Pilot Wave Theory

None of those things are of concern to modern research. We've had at least 80 years to develop a better model, called quantum field theory.

no they can't. pilot wave theory makes the exact same predictions.

>>9117448
>theory
It's not a theory, it's an interpretation. There are no empirical interpretations of QM, and QM itself doesn't imply any of the woo woo nonsense it is apparently so famous for. Pilot wave doesn't deserve any respect because it isn't a scientific fucking concept, it's a rationalization that isn't based on any fucking data just like every other fucking interpretation out there.

>>9117448
Probably because science and indyustry is stucked with the conventional quantum mechanics, btw, what are the predictions for quantum entanglement from the pilot wave view?

File: 1355500908003.png (126KB, 513x328px) Image search: [Google]

126KB, 513x328px

>>9117498
The thing is, pilot wave theory is more intuitive than QM. And that is a plus.

File: dse.webm (627KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

627KB, 1920x1080px

>>9117448
How does pilot wave explain DLE with photons?

>>9117703
*DSE

>>9117685
What the fuck are you on about? Pilot wave isn't a fucking model. It makes no predictions and only serves to explain QM itself, which is why it's known as an interpretation of QM. What got it in your head that these two are somehow competing ideas? Pilot wave wouldn't exist if we didn't already all belief QM is true.

>>9117822
I didn't say it was a model. I just said it is intuitive.

>>9117703
>>9117706
anybody

>>9117844
You said it is "more intuitive than QM". What does that even mean? Pilot wave isn't true if QM isn't true.

>>9117454
This is better for some things.

>>9117448
PWT is great for non relativistic QM, but have you seen the clusterfuck of ad hock explanations they add to make it relativistic? its even worse than QFT. take for example a photon being absorbed by an atom, the electromagnetic field interacts wit the atom, then somehow (in PWT) the entire electromagnetic field / quantum potential of EMF instantly instantly changes FTL to account for the energy being given to the atom, now lets have 2 observers in different frames, since PWT is supposed to describe reality does the electromagnetic field change in the first or second guys frame? because its different one will see the field change, one will have the field already changed, but it depends on whose frame you are. How is this more intuitive than QFT where the system is in a superposition of states, which collapses for each observer independently?

and to people saying it makes the same predictions, it doesn't, it only does if you add another ad hock rule that the system must always be in equilibrium, if its allowed to be out of equilibrium then there are measurable differences with quantum mechanics for short time periods (if we can measure it with current technology im not sure, but I assume we cant since people still argue about PWT vs QM).

But the worse part is that to extract the quantum potential in QFT you have to rewrite the equations in such a shit way that you loose all symmetries, have to work in a preferred frame and all kinds of bullshit which is much more elegant in QFT, the math is horrible and you cant even do any calculations in it, its no wonder no one wants to deal with that shit. I really tried to like it after seeing it for non relativistic QM, but its shit.

>>9117448
>conscious observers
Good job proving your ignorance in the first post. 5/5

File: paths.png (152KB, 1024x925px) Image search: [Google]

152KB, 1024x925px

>>9117847

>>9117448
>quantum theory that can't handle spin
Hurrdurr why is it not popular?