On which side of the Quantum Reality are you?

[Dr Alain L Fymat]

The so-called “quantum measurement problem” lies at the heart of the quantum reality question. It is fair to state that if we could say what actually goes on in a measurement, we would know what physical reality is all about.

De Broglie showed that quantum theory could be explained in terms of an ordinary wave guiding an ordinary particle, i.e., a particle possessing innate (static) attributes (mass, charge, and spin, for instance). However, subsequently, von Neumann proved mathematically that quantum theory is incompatible with the real existence of ordinary objects.

Nonetheless, despite von Neumann’s proof and following de Broglie, Bohm proved that an ordinary reality interpretation of quantum theory was possible. In Bohm’s model, the electron is an ordinary object connected to a new field – the so-called “pilot wave” – which guides its movement according to a new law of motion. Both wave and particle are real, but the pilot wave is invisible, observable only indirectly via its effects on the electron. Thus, the electron’s contextual behavior is simulated using entities (pilot wave plus particle) whose attributes are not contextual. Unfortunately, Bohm’s model requires the pilot wave to travel at faster-than-light speed, a feature forbidden by Einstein’s special theory of relativity.

The orthodox ontology to which the majority of physicists subscribe rests on one central postulate that is made up of the following components: (1) All quons in the same quantum state are physically identical; (2) The wave function gives a complete account of the physical situation of a single quon; (3) The relationship of the experimenter to an unmeasured quon is one of “quantum ignorance” (meaning the knowledge he lacks is simply not there to be known); (4) A single unmeasured quon takes all paths open to it; and (5) Measured differences between identical unmeasured quons arise from “quantum randomness”. On the other , the unorthodox ontology espoused by a minority of physicists rests on the opposite posulate: (1) Quons in the same state are physically different; (2) The wave function gives a statistical description of an ensemble of quons, and a necessary incomplete description of a single quon; (3) The experimenter’s relationship to an un measured quon is one of “classical ignorance” (meaning certain variables which quantum theory omits are “hidden” from view, which gave the name to these physicists as “hidden variable physicists”): and (5) Quons in the same state show measurable differences because they were physically different before measurement.

So, do you support an orthodox physicist or a hidden variable physicist?