• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

Experimental Comparison of Bohm-like Theories with Different Primary Ontologies Arthur O. T. Pang,1, ∗ Hugo Ferretti,1 Noah Lupu-Gladstein,1 Weng-Kian Tham,1 Aharon Brodutch,1, y Kent Bonsma-Fisher,1, 2, z J. E. Sipe,1, x and Aephraim M. Steinberg1, 3, { 1Department of Physics and Centre for Quantum Information Quantum Control University of Toronto; 60 St George St; Toronto; Ontario; M5S 1A7; Canada 2National Research Council of Canada; 100 Sussex Dr; Ottawa; Ontario; K1A 0R6; Canada 3Canadian Institute for Advanced Research; Toronto; Ontario; M5G 1M1; Canada (Dated: November 19, 2020) The de Broglie-Bohm theory is a hidden-variable interpretation of quantum mechanics which involves particles moving through space along deterministic trajectories. This theory singles out position as the primary ontological variable. Mathematically, it is possible to construct a similar theory where particles are moving through momentum-space, and momentum is singled out as the primary ontological variable. In this paper, we construct the putative particle trajectories for a two- slit experiment in both the position and momentum-space theories by simulating particle dynamics with coherent light. Using a method for constructing trajectories in the primary and non-primary spaces, we compare the phase-space dynamics offered by the two theories and show that they do not agree. This contradictory behaviour underscores the difficulty of selecting one picture of reality from the infinite number of possibilities offered by Bohm-like theories. I. INTRODUCTION Bohm's work by the pioneers of quantum theory [13]. Shortly after Bohm's paper appeared, Epstein [14, 15] Bohm's hidden-variable interpretation of quantum me- pointed out that there is nothing inherent in the formu- chanics [1, 2], also known as Bohmian mechanics or de lation that requires position to be the primary ontolog- Broglie-Bohm theory [3, 4], is an alternative formulation ical variable, and that other possible choices can lead of quantum mechanics with a clear deterministic ontol- to other results - i.e. different ontological descriptions - ogy, and experimental predictions that match those of while still yielding experimental predictions identical to quantum theory. The theory continues to attract atten- those of quantum theory. tion as a provocative demonstration that a deterministic, In this paper, we demonstrate how different choices of no-collapse interpretation of quantum mechanics is pos- the primary ontological variable can lead to qualitatively sible [5{11]. As is the case in classical physics, Bohmian different trajectories. Using light in a double-slit setup particles have well defined properties at all times. In to simulate the mechanics of massive particles [16], and Bohmian theory all properties can be determined from building on a previously demonstrated approach [7, 8], we the particle's actual position and the guiding wave, giving construct the trajectories in both Bohm's theory (which position special ontological significance. Wiseman [12] we refer to as x-Bohm) and an alternative theory in which showed that it is possible to experimentally extract the momentum is the primary ontological variable (p-Bohm). velocities attributed to Bohmian particles by taking con- The differences between the trajectories in the two the- ditional averages of weak measurements on an ensemble ories illustrate why the results of previous experiments of post-selected systems. Extending his ideas, some of [7, 8] should be understood as specific instances of the the present authors and others were recently able to con- many possible ontological descriptions of the same sys- struct the putative Bohmian trajectories in various two- tem. Selecting one out of the multitude of possible theo- slit experiments [7, 8, 10, 11]. ries { with their conflicting phase-space dynamics of the The choice of position as the primary ontological vari- state of the system { requires supplementary assumptions able introduces an asymmetry which is foreign to both or assertions [5, 12, 17], emphasizing one of the features arXiv:1910.13405v3 [quant-ph] 17 Nov 2020 classical and quantum mechanics. In classical Hamil- in Bohm's approach that some would consider a weak- tonian mechanics, position and momentum act as the ness. canonical phase space variables and are both equally im- portant in formulating the theory, and in orthodox quan- We begin in Sec. II by describing some of the basic tum mechanics position and momentum are treated on features of the x-Bohm and p-Bohm theories, and the equal footing. So the importance placed on position in method for constructing trajectories through a sequence the Bohmian approach was one of the main criticisms of of weak and strong measurements. In Sec. III we lay out the details of our experiment, including the specifics of the lens system and the weak measurement procedure. ∗ [email protected] The results of the experiments, including plots of the y [email protected] trajectories and phase space snapshots at the near and z kent.bonsma-fi[email protected] far field are presented in Sec. IV for both the x-Bohm x [email protected] and p-Bohm theories. The implications of our results are { [email protected] discussed in Sec. V. 2 II. BOHMIAN THEORY non-primary variables. This allows us to compare the two theories by contrasting their predictions for trajectories Contrary to classical mechanics, which allows for the in the same space. We focus on the one-dimensional mo- deterministic prediction of the motion of particles, quan- tion of a single particle, where the classical Hamiltonian tum mechanics only offers statistical predictions for the as a function of position and momentum is H(x; p), and results of measurements. Yet in 1952 David Bohm in- denote the coordinate wave function by (x; t) and the troduced [1, 2] a deterministic dynamical theory that momentum wave function by ~(p; t). The Schr¨odinger its advocates argue provides an underlying description equations for these two wave functions are more fundamental than quantum mechanics [17, 18]. In his generalization and extension of earlier ideas by de Broglie [17], the positions of particles play the role of @ @ i¯h (x; t) =H x; −i¯h (x; t) (1) hidden-variables; their motion is characterized by well- @t @x defined trajectories, as the particles are \guided" by the @ @ Schr¨odingerwave. In this approach, position variables, i¯h ~(p; t) =H i¯h ; p ~(p; t): (2) @t @p together with the Schr¨odingerwave, have a special signif- icance as the primary ontological variables; the momenta of particles simply follow from their velocities, which are A. Position Ontological Bohmian Theory (x-Bohm) determined by the gradient of the Schr¨odinger wave at the positions of the particles. The symmetry of posi- tion and momentum that characterizes orthodox quan- In Bohm's original theory [1, 2], the particle's posi- tum mechanics is broken, with position variables more tion and the wave function (x; t) constitute the objec- tively real elements from which all other properties can fundamental than momentum variables. 2 Shortly after Bohm's work appeared, Epstein [14, 15] be derived . In describing an ensemble of experimen- noted that different choices of the primary ontological tal runs, at some initial time (t = 0) each particle is assumed to have a definite position according to a prob- variable can lead to different theories. In particular, 2 one could work with the momentum representation of ability distribution function j (x; 0)j , and each particle the wave function and build a theory where particles is guided through space by the wave function. Writing are characterized fundamentally by their momenta1. In (x; t) = Rx (x; t) exp [iSx (x; t) =¯h], where Rx (x; t) and Sx (x; t) are real functions of position and time, for a contrast to Bohm's original theory, which we refer to as 2 \x-Bohm," in Epstein's proposal, which we refer to as a Hamiltonian of the form H(x; p) = p =2m + V (x) the \p-Bohm" theory, it is momentum that has primary onto- guidance equation is logical status. In his reply to Epstein [19], Bohm pointed 1 @S (x; t) v (x; t) = x ; (3) out technical difficulties in implementing a \p-Bohm" ap- x 2m @x proach when the Hamiltonian involved the Coulomb po- tential. But he also argued that an \x-Bohm" approach, and the trajectory for each particle is given by where particle position and the coordinate representation dx (t) of the wave function are the primary ontological vari- = vx (x (t) ; t) : (4) ables, seemed more favored because \in all fields other dt than the quantum theory, space and time have thus far Since the expression (3) for the velocity vx(x; t) can also stood out as the natural frame for the description of the be written as [4] progress of physical phenomena." [19] Nevertheless, al- ternate approaches were developed further a few decades jx (x; t) vx (x; t) = ; (5) later by Bohm and his collaborators [20], and a gen- j (x; t)j2 eral framework for such theories was discussed by Hol- land [4, 21, 22] and others [23, 24]. where jx(x; t) is the usual probability current density of In the rest of this section we sketch both x-Bohm and orthodox quantum mechanics, p-Bohm theory, discuss the trajectories that follow from ¯h @ (x; t) @ ∗ (x; t) each, and show how { under the assumption that one of j (x; t) = ∗ (x; t) − (x; t) ; x 2mi @x @x the theories is correct { its associated trajectories can be (6) revealed by weak measurements. We begin with trajec- tories of the primary ontological variable of the particles { position for x-Bohm and momentum for p-Bohm { and then turn to the trajectories that can be associated with 2 For an N-particle system the wave function is a function over the 3N-dimensional configuration space of the system, and since the wave function is granted ontological significance that config- uration space must be taken as the underlying arena of reality; 1 The possibility of a velocity-based theory had already been raised the wave function and a point in this configuration space, iden- by Pauli at the 1927 Solvay conference in response to de Broglie's tifying the positions of all N particles, are best taken to identify pilot wave theory [1, 17].

Load more

  16

Copy Link