Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T02:22:54.603Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Is de Broglie-Bohm Theory Specially Equipped to Recover Classical Behavior?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2022

Joshua Rosaler
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Supporters of the de Broglie-Bohm (dBB) interpretation of quantum theory argue that because the theory, like classical mechanics, concerns the motions of point particles in 3D space, it is specially suited to recover classical behavior. I offer a novel account of classicality in dBB theory, if only to show that such an account falls out almost trivially from results developed in the largely interpretation-neutral context of decoherence theory. I then argue that this undermines any special claim that dBB theory is purported to have on the unification of the quantum and classical realms.

Type
Quantum Physics
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 82 , Issue 5 , December 2015 , pp. 1175 - 1187
Copyright
Copyright © The Philosophy of Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

†

Thanks to David Wallace, Simon Saunders, Harvey Brown, Christopher Timpson, and Jeremy Butterfield for comments on earlier drafts of this work and to Cian Dorr for helpful discussions of de Broglie-Bohm theory. Thanks also to audiences in Oxford, Sussex, Vallico Soto, and Chicago. This work was supported by the University of Oxford Clarendon fund and the University of Pittsburgh’s Center for Philosophy of Science.

References

Allori, V., Dürr, D., Goldstein, S., and Zangh, N.. 2002. “Seven Steps towards the Classical World.” Journal of Optics B 4 (4): S482–S488.Google Scholar
Bohm, D. 1952a. “A Suggested Interpretation of the Quantum Theory in Terms of ‘Hidden’ Variables.” Pt. 1. Physical Review 85 (2): 166–79.Google Scholar
Bohm, D. 1952b. “A Suggested Interpretation of the Quantum Theory in Terms of ‘Hidden’ Variables.” Pt. 2. Physical Review 85 (2): 180–93.Google Scholar
Bohm, D., and Hiley, B. J.. 1995. The Undivided Universe: An Ontological Interpretation of Quantum Theory. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Bowman, G. E. 2005. “On the Classical Limit in Bohm’s Theory.” Foundations of Physics 35 (4): 605–25.10.1007/s10701-004-2013-7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, H. R., and Wallace, D.. 2005. “Solving the Measurement Problem: De Broglie-Bohm Loses out to Everett.” Foundations of Physics 35 (4): 517–40.10.1007/s10701-004-2009-3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Durr, Detlef, and Teufel, Stefan. 2009. Bohmian Mechanics: The Physics and Mathematics of Quantum Theory. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
Gell-Mann, M., and Hartle, J. B.. 1993. “Classical Equations for Quantum Systems.” Physical Review D 47 (8): 3345.Google ScholarPubMed
Griffiths, R. B. 1984. “Consistent Histories and the Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics.” Journal of Statistical Physics 36 (1): 219–72.10.1007/BF01015734CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Halliwell, J. J. 1995. “A Review of the Decoherent Histories Approach to Quantum Mechanics.” Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 755 (1): 726–40.10.1111/j.1749-6632.1995.tb39014.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hartle, James B. 2011. “The Quasi-Classical Realms of This Quantum Universe.” Foundations of Physics 41 (6): 982–1006.10.1007/s10701-010-9460-0CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holland, P. R. 1995. The Quantum Theory of Motion: An Account of the de Broglie-Bohm Causal Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Joos, E., Zeh, D., Kiefer, C., Giulini, D., Kupsch, J., and Stamatescu, I.-O.. 2003. Decoherence and the Appearance of a Classical World in Quantum Theory. 2nd ed. New York: Springer.10.1007/978-3-662-05328-7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maroney, O. J. E. 2005. “The Density Matrix in the de Broglie-Bohm Approach.” Foundations of Physics 35 (3): 493–510.10.1007/s10701-004-1985-7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schlosshauer, M. A. 2008. Decoherence and the Quantum-to-Classical Transition. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
Wallace, D. 2012. The Emergent Multiverse: Quantum Theory according to the Everett Interpretation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199546961.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zurek, W. H., Habib, S., and Paz, J. P.. 1993. “Coherent States Via Decoherence.” Physical Review Letters 70 (9): 1187–90.10.1103/PhysRevLett.70.1187CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zurek, W. H., and Paz, J. P.. 1995. “Quantum Chaos: A Decoherent Definition.” Physica D 83 (1): 300–308.Google Scholar