Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Nodrog
I havent heard this before, but Einstein died only 3 years after Bohm published his theory so I'm sceptical over whether this is true. Anyway, I dont think too much weight could be given to Einstein's opinion here since he didnt live to see Bell's theorem and the relevant experiments. Einstein believed that there could be a hidden variables interpretation of QM, yet it was later shown that this could only be the case if you were willing to accept non-locality. Whether this would have caused him to abandon determinism or locality can only be a matter of speculation - in any case, the claim that the superstructure is 'unnecessary' would be wrong.
|
It wasn't 1257 dude, it didn't take three years for news to move around the globe. I'm aware of bell's theorem and the relevant experiments, my point was that even someone as virulently opposed to QM as einstein didn't exactly support bohm's interpretation.
"Things only have probabilities of happening." Not insanely hard to understand.
Quote:
|
When you describe the interaction of a quantum system with a measuring apparatus in purely quantum mechanical terms, treating the measuring apparatus as being a collection of particles subject to the laws of QM, you end up with the measuring apparatus being in a superposition of states. This in conflict with the fact that we do, in practice, get a single definite measurement. Standard QM gives no explanation of how this is possible - its not that it doesnt explain how we get the value we get (although it doesnt do that either) - it doesnt explain how we can get _any_ value. The standard solution to this is to declare that the measurement apparatus has to be treated as a classical object, but this is ad hoc and arbitrary.
|
Feynman's sum over paths method got rid of most of the amplitudes by virtue of the fact they cancelled each other out if you're looking for something funkily different. I don't really have that much of a problem with the idea that once you interfer with the system you certain results.
Quote:
|
Sort of, but not in quite the same way. Standard QM navigates around the non-locality issues with a fair bit of handwaving, whereas its very very explicit in Bohm's theory.
|
i'm not sure what you mean by a "fair bit of handwaving".