Related papers: Reply to `No Contradictions between Bohmian and qu…

The supposed equivalence of the conventional interpretation of quantum mechanics with Bohm's interpretation is generally demonstrated only in the coordinate representation. It is shown, however, that in the momentum representation this…

This is a Reply to the Comment by Vaidman in arXiv:2306.16756 on the paper: R. B. Griffiths, Phys. Rev. A 107, 062219 (2023)

In recent literature, it has become clear that quantum physics does not refute Humeanism. This point has so far been made with respect to Bohms quantum theory. Against this background, this paper seeks to achieve the following four results:…

We show that there is no real difference between mathematical models of quantum mechanics and classical mechanics concerning integrable dynamical systems because the main difference between them results from their different interpretations.

In this article it is shown that the fundamental equations of relativistic Bohmian mechanics for multiple bosonic particles have a dual description in terms of a classical theory of curved space-time. We further generalize the results to…

While much of the technical analysis in the preceding Comment [1] is correct, in the end it confirms the conclusion reached in my previous work [2]: a consistent histories analysis provides no support for the claim of counterfactual quantum…

In a recent paper Griffiths claims that the consistent histories interpretation of quantum mechanics gives rise to results that contradict those obtained from the Bohm interpretation. This is in spite of the fact that both claim to provide…

In the Comment [Eur. J. Phys., to be published] on our paper [Eur. J. Phys. 19 (1998) 1-6], the author declares that we claim that the ratio of inertial mass to gravitational mass can be derived ex nihilo and that our paper was published…

It is shown that the recent criticism of Brevik et al. (hep-th/0004041) is in error.

In an article published in 2010, Kiukas and Werner claim to have shown that Bohmian Mechanics does not make the same empirical predictions as ordinary Quantum Mechanics. We explain that such claim is wrong.

I show that the claim of the paper [arXiv:1310.2185] on the absence of instability for a minimally coupled scalar field on a static spherically symmetric gravitational background is incorrect.

Recently it has been claimed that no extension of quantum theory can have improved predictive power, the statement following, according to the authors, from the assumptions of free will and of the correctness of quantum predictions…

In this Comment I point out some limitations of the proposal of Prezhdo and Brooksby for coupling quantum and classical degrees of freedom (Phys.Rev.Lett.86(2001)3215) if it is pushed too far.

A review of "Bohmian Mechanics and Quantum Theory: An Appraisal" (James Cushing, Arthur Fine and Sheldon Goldstein, Eds.), an extensive collection of articles on Bohmian mechanics. In addition to broad, critical overviews of Bohmian…

It is shown that, for a harmonic oscillator in the ground state, Bohmian mechanics and quantum mechanics predict values of opposite sign for certain time correlations. The discrepancy can be explained by the fact that Bohmian mechanics has…

This paper has been withdrawn, as all conjectures (and one claim) have been proven incorrect. Some of what remains may eventually reappear in a different context.

The violation of Bell type inequalities in quantum systems manifests that quantum states cannot be described by classical probability distributions. Yet, Bohmian mechanics is a realistic, non-local theory of classical particle trajectories…

This paper discusses the existence of black holes from the foundations of quantum mechanics. It is found that quantum mechanics rule out a possible gravitational collapse.

Since Bohmian mechanics is explicitly nonlocal, it is widely believed that it is very hard, if not impossible, to make Bohmian mechanics compatible with relativistic quantum field theory (QFT). I explain, in simple terms, that it is not…

We explain why the objections raised by Golubev et al. in a comment on cond-mat/0111398 are not valid.