Son Goku explained that both the standard and Bohmian versions of quantum mechanics yield the same experimental results regarding quantum uncertainty (as phrased in the article, "particles don't have a location until they're observed"), and that the only way to distinguish between the two was to observe the trajectories suggested by the Bohmian model. The experiment described in the article suggests that such trajectories may have been observed, with the emphasis on "may." Son Goku questions how much weight should be given the experiment's use of "weak measurements," and the article echoes this when it says:
quote:So let's step back for a second here and break this down. First thing's first, this is just one study, and A LOT more replication and verification would be needed before the standard view comes crumbling down. So don't go burning any text books just yet, okay? Good.
Particle trajectories seems to me an incredibly obscure subject of discussion, but as the article describes the implications are dramatic, for if the Bohmian model is correct it means that particles *do* have precise locations. Success of the Bohmian model would also mean that nonlocality is true, meaning that everything in the universe is always affected by everything else in the universe, no matter how far apart, which would have implications for our interpretation of what Einstein called, "spooky action at a distance," what we observe as quantum entanglement.
According to the article the Bohmiam view fell into disfavor when a 1992 study found that it required outlandish particle trajectories, but this new study suggests that because of nonlocality the information about trajectories is not reliable.
Dr. Henry Stapp's writings are extremely interesting. He seems to prove, analyzing the brain research, that the quantum choice is coming "from nowhere", from some transcendent "world of mind". So, according to his worldview, the Physical Reality is no more than "structure of tendencies/probabilities within the world of mind".
So as a receiver enters the end zone while the football descends into his outstretched hands before 70,000 onlookers, what is going on in all their worlds of mind? Is there a negotiation? Is there a branching of realities into "touchdown," "incompletion, "under review," and all possibilities in between? Something else?
To me such ideas seem the kind of typical anthropocentric claptrap we humans are so prone to, as if nothing ever happened (no wave functions collapsed) until we humans developed consciousness.
This thread's actually about whether particles *do* have precise locations. At the time I proposed this thread I was all primed, locked and loaded to discuss the topic, but I can't maintain readiness for months on topics that are at the limits of my understanding, even on a good day. I'd have to reread everything before I could be ready to discuss and misunderstand this topic again, and if anyone is interested then I'll do that.