Timeline for Bohmian mechanics, Leggett inequality, realism and nonlocality
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 16 at 21:53 | vote | accept | truebaran | ||
| Jul 16 at 17:24 | comment | added | truebaran | Thank you, I feel that now I'm even more unlikely to convert into a Bohmian! :D | |
| Jul 16 at 16:19 | comment | added | Caesar.tcl | @truebaran To comment on your last remark: I think this is indeed the case! Bohmian mechanics is much less "hidden variable" than many people assume. It also comes down to what you expect a realistic theory to do in terms of realism. I (and many others) would argue that it all boils down to having an objective reality "without anyone looking". The state of the universe does not depend on measuring that state (although, thanks to contextuality, the precise result of the measurement does indeed depend on how you set up the measuring apparatus). | |
| Jul 16 at 16:14 | comment | added | Caesar.tcl | And tbf I wouldn't say that BM is immune to these kinds of no-go theorems. You would just have to show that no arrangement of measuring apparatus and system (contextuality...) allows a positional measurement to describe the state of the system in all detail. But I think this is impossible. | |
| Jul 16 at 16:10 | comment | added | Caesar.tcl | @truebaran You're right that I based my argument on the Leggett-Garg inequality. But it wouldn't change the argument, since, as you already pointed out, many (if not most) of the realistic QM no-go theorems are based on measuring rather general properties/states of the system (and their evolution in time, hence the need for non-commuting operators), and Bohmian mechanics does not fulfill this assumption, since we only have position there. | |
| Jul 16 at 15:40 | comment | added | truebaran | And also, if it is so that only positions have definite values than Bohmian mechanics is very much less realistic then it is believed to be! | |
| Jul 16 at 15:39 | comment | added | truebaran | Thank you for your answer! I believe that when you are referring to macroscopic realism you mean Leggett-Garg inequality instead of Leggett, is it right? Or maybe it doesn't matter since the overall upshot is that ,,only positions have definite values"? If only positions can be assigned definite value that automatically Bohm's mechanic would be immune to any kind of no-go inequalities since they always use noncommuting operators (which would be not allowed by Bohmian mechanics)... | |
| Jul 16 at 13:28 | history | answered | Caesar.tcl | CC BY-SA 4.0 |