1
$\begingroup$

I was reading Can Bohmian mechanics be made relativistic? from 2016 that attempts to reconcile Bohmian mechanics with relativity. It’s conclusion says:

Is such a theory then fundamentally—and/or seriously—relativistic? This is not an easy question to answer, because it is not at all clear what, exactly, fundamental/serious compatibility with relativity does, or should, require.

However, it doesn’t mention anything about gravity. So I read A Pilot-Wave Gravity and the Titius-Bode Law from 2018 about reconciling the pilot-wave interpretation with the Titius-Bode Law by developing a theory of quantum gravity they call “pilot-wave gravity”.

Abstract. Since its initial proposal in 1766, Titius-Bode empirical law has remained a puzzling source of discomfort as it predicts the average distances from the planets to the Sun for no apparent reason. Using a framework analogous to de Broglie’s pilot wave theory and the self-organizing Principle of Eurhythmy, we claim that several main physical quantities describing the Solar System are quantified. Hence the Titius-Bode Law is a direct manifestation of gravitational pilot-waves at work in the Solar System.

According to one of the authors:

"General relativity, on the other hand, must accept that gravitational phenomena can only be fully described if one also applies a wave model. In other words, there will be some aspects best described using general relativity and others best described using pilot wave gravity," said Castro.

Would pilot-wave gravity reconcile Bohmian mechanics with relativity? Would such a theory actually disprove Copenhagen’s interpretation?

Improve this question
$\endgroup$
9
  • $\begingroup$ Are you asking if the paper you mention (re the Titus-Bode Law) is a proper theory of quantum gravity ? $\endgroup$
    – StephenG - Help Ukraine
    Commented Oct 11, 2018 at 14:32
  • $\begingroup$ @StephenG Not exactly. I would like to ask that if it’s a proper question for this site. I’m asking if it would make Bohmian mechanics relativistic. In other words, does the paper from 2018 answer the question posed in 2016? $\endgroup$
    – Cannabijoy
    Commented Oct 11, 2018 at 14:35
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ @Qmechanic Can I ask why this question has been put on hold as off topic? OP's main source is a published, peer reviewed, journal article. Bohmian mechanics, although unpopular among physicists, gives the same predictions as standard QM, so I can't see how trying to unify QM and Gravity using Bohmian mechanics methods should be instantly flagged as off topic. Not unless you were gonna ban all other topics trying to unify QM and GR as well, e.g. LQG and String theory. $\endgroup$
    – enumaris
    Commented Oct 11, 2018 at 16:58
  • $\begingroup$ think you have excellent point about the article being apparently mainstream under those criteria. would like to see question stay open but so called "self-organizing Principle of Eurhythmy" sounds highly questionable from mainstream pov. btw site policy on nonmainstram physics seems to be unaware of the thorny philosophy behind that supposed reasonable restriction eg/ aka en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demarcation_problem $\endgroup$
    – vzn
    Commented Oct 11, 2018 at 17:03
  • $\begingroup$ @enumaris: Partly because the link is non-mainstream. $\endgroup$
    – Qmechanic ♦
    Commented Oct 11, 2018 at 17:09

0

Reset to default