Physicists today remain largely unaware of the fact that quantum mechanics is perfectly choreographed by the mathematics of the de Broglie-Bohm theory, otherwise known as Bohmian mechanics. Despite the fact that Bohm’s formalism is entirely deterministic, and less vague than the standard interpretation of quantum mechanics, so far it has only been widely recognized and embraced among philosophers of physics.
There are several historical events, or “unfortunate accidents,” that have led to the present ignorance of the superior mathematical clarity Bohm’s formalism offers. Understanding this historical posture goes a long way towards explaining why the orthodox or “standard” interpretation of quantum mechanics is still held by the majority of physicists today—something that I would argue is one of the greatest intellectual tragedies of our time.
We now have 7 members on the forums, and 100 followers on Twitter at @bohmsociety. This is important. Most communities like ours start small. To carry the proposals made by David Bohm we need people like you and I who are interested enough in all of this. If we can’t bring some of these proposals to life who else will? We need all the help and support we can get so do considering joining on us these attempts.
The conversation starts off with Professor Maurice Pryce stating:
In this discussion I seem to stand for orthodoxy and you for unorthodoxy—that’s fair, isn’t it? For instance, you’d criticize the orthodox viewpoint on the ground that it doesn’t give enough prominence to actuality in physical theory. Is that right?
We will also later be launching an email list and Google Hangout or Skype conversations. It’s important that the few of us who have deep interest in proposals about thought are able to participate together and assist each other, if even only at a distance.
We would also like to list the projects of others who are exploring what thought is doing to the world. Do contact us if you are aware of any projects we have over looked.
Those of us who are interested in the proposals of Bohm and related others must carry out these projects and experiments. No one else is going to do it. This is truly a grassroots movement so do not underestimate the difference you could make as a single person if you are serious enough about these things.
Your question is excellent. We call a walker the ensemble of the droplet and its associated wave. Since the work you refer to we have shown that the wave field contains a memory of the past trajectory that is at the origin of the quantum like effects we observe. You will find attached a recent work dealing with this effect. In the double slit experiment, while the droplet passes through one slit the associated wave passes through both so that one coud say that the walker passes through both. Our system is similar to a pilot wave system and this is what we are working on recently. These models are usually called de Broglie – Bohm models, a term that is very misleading because the two approaches are different from one another. Bohm gets a dynamical equation from Shrödinger equation so that it concerns the dynamics of a maximum of probability. What de Broglie had in mind was a the dynamics of an individual particle associated with a wave. Our system appears to be closer to de Broglie. — Yves Couder