Tom
Jim Farmelant wrote:
> On Sun, 10 Dec 2000 03:58:49 -0800 "jan carowan" <jancarowan at hotmail.com>
> writes:
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> >
> > See you do not even know what Bell's theorem is. If you did, it
> > would be
> > obvious to you that Einstein's and Bohm's positions confront great
> > difficulties.
>
> Well, Bohm at least would have disagreed. He saw his causal
> interpretation
> of quantum mechanics as implying the essential wholeness of
> quantum phenomena. For Bohm apparent nonlocality is generated
> by what he called the quantum potential, which according to his theory
> exerts an influence that is dependent on its overall form rather than
> on its strength. Now for a long time the fact that Bohm's theory
> like conventional QM implies nonlocality was taken as indicating
> the existence of a contradiction within Bohm's theory. On the
> one hand Bohm was proposing a causal interpretation of QM
> but nonlocality seemed inconsistent with this. This dilemma
> for instance led his onetime coolaborator Jean-Paul Vigier
> to abandon research on the causal interpretation of QM and
> to turn his attention to cosmology. Bohm, himself dropped
> his work on the development of a hidden variable's alternative
> to convention QM for many years also. However, in the 1970s
> when Christopher Philippidis who had been a graduate
> student of Bohm, pursued reaearch aimed at calculating
> the shape of the quantum potential. He then applied
> these calculations to a consideration of the Ehrenberg-
> Siday-Aharonov-Bohm (ESAB) effect. Whereas, the
> conventional interpretation of QM took this effect as
> indicating the existence of nonlocality, within
> Bohm's causal interpretation of QM, this effect is explicalble
> in terms of the quantum potential which while modified
> by the presence of an electrical field is not diminished
> by distance.
>
> >Einstein presumed that sense experience can be
> > understood in
> > terms of an idea of some external reality whose spatially separated
> > parts
> > are independent realities, in the sense that they depend on each
> > other only
> > via connections that respect space time separation in the usual way:
>
> Bohm came to the conclusion that Einstein's assumptions
> on this did indeed have to be modified. A return to classical
> physics was forever forclosed but that Einstein's quest for
> a casual interpretation of quantum mechanics was
> not thereby (contrary to Bohr & Heisenberg) ruled out.
>
> >
> > instaneous connections are excluded. But the existence of such a
> > reality
> > lying behind the world of observed phenomena is precisely what
> > Bell's
> > theorem--not the Tao of physics--proves to be impossible.
>
> Bell, himself BTW saw Bohm's hidden varaibles theory as
> being nonlocal just as he saw conventional QM. His own
> work on this subject owed much to Bohm
>
> Jim F.
>
> >
>
> >
> > Warm regards, Jan
> >
> >
> >
> >
> _________________________________________________________________________
> ____________
> > Get more from the Web. FREE MSN Explorer download :
> > http://explorer.msn.com
> >
>
> ________________________________________________________________
> GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
> Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
> Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit:
> http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.