290
M. Svrˇ cek
“arrow of time” becomes inadequate in the quantum world and without such readings
the Copenhagen interpretation remains incomplete.
4 Bohm’s Five Prophetic Statements
Bohm is largely known for his attempts to invigorate the theory of hidden parameters,
originally formulated by de Broglie as the contentious pilot-wave theory, adding the
well-known conception of the famed quantum potential [14]. However, this appears
to lead nowhere. The theory of hidden parameters cannot be helpful for a solution of
the incompleteness problem associated with the Copenhagen interpretation. Nevertheless, as is less known, thirty years after he published his new version of non-local
hidden parameters, Bohm arrived at five important critical conclusions regarding
the aforementioned lack of completeness. He himself never found the resolution,
since his own Bohmian Mechanics indeed suffers from the same shortcomings as
the Copenhagen interpretation, believing that it will be answered in the future by
some new modifications of the hidden variable idea. As can be seen, it is easier to
be critical rather than finding the correct solution.
These five critical points of Bohm are of extraordinary relevance, because neither
the Copenhagen interpretation nor any other rendering is able to cope with them, to
take their ideas into consideration fulfilling their requirements. I will cite them all
and give my reflections and detailed remarks below. The first four are taken from his
book Wholeness and the Implicate Order [15], the last fifth from his dialogue with
the biologist Sheldrake [16].
The first quote runs:
1. “Nevertheless, in most of the work that is being done in physics today the notions
of formative and final cause are not regarded as having primary significance.
Rather, law is still generally conceived as a self-determined system of efficient
causes, operating in an ultimate set of material constituents of the universe (e.g.
elementary particles subject to forces of interaction between them). These constituents are not regarded as formed in an overall process, and thus they are not
considered to be anything like organs adapted to their place and function in the
whole (i.e. to the ends which they would serve in this whole). Rather, they tend
to be conceived as separately existent mechanical elements of a fixed nature.”
Here Bohm discerns two categories of causes—efficient and final, according to
the ancient classification introduced by Aristotle. Nature is full of phenomena based
on final causes, but unfortunately the science of physics (classical, relativistic or
quantum) is unable to incorporate them and represent them in some form of meaningful equations. What is even worse, physicists often do not recognize final causes
at all treating the relevant phenomena as they would be induced by efficient causes.
A nice example is the spontaneous symmetry breaking. Since it is believed that nothing in nature is spontaneous, physicists not seeing any explicit efficient cause, they
M. Svrˇ cek
“arrow of time” becomes inadequate in the quantum world and without such readings
the Copenhagen interpretation remains incomplete.
4 Bohm’s Five Prophetic Statements
Bohm is largely known for his attempts to invigorate the theory of hidden parameters,
originally formulated by de Broglie as the contentious pilot-wave theory, adding the
well-known conception of the famed quantum potential [14]. However, this appears
to lead nowhere. The theory of hidden parameters cannot be helpful for a solution of
the incompleteness problem associated with the Copenhagen interpretation. Nevertheless, as is less known, thirty years after he published his new version of non-local
hidden parameters, Bohm arrived at five important critical conclusions regarding
the aforementioned lack of completeness. He himself never found the resolution,
since his own Bohmian Mechanics indeed suffers from the same shortcomings as
the Copenhagen interpretation, believing that it will be answered in the future by
some new modifications of the hidden variable idea. As can be seen, it is easier to
be critical rather than finding the correct solution.
These five critical points of Bohm are of extraordinary relevance, because neither
the Copenhagen interpretation nor any other rendering is able to cope with them, to
take their ideas into consideration fulfilling their requirements. I will cite them all
and give my reflections and detailed remarks below. The first four are taken from his
book Wholeness and the Implicate Order [15], the last fifth from his dialogue with
the biologist Sheldrake [16].
The first quote runs:
1. “Nevertheless, in most of the work that is being done in physics today the notions
of formative and final cause are not regarded as having primary significance.
Rather, law is still generally conceived as a self-determined system of efficient
causes, operating in an ultimate set of material constituents of the universe (e.g.
elementary particles subject to forces of interaction between them). These constituents are not regarded as formed in an overall process, and thus they are not
considered to be anything like organs adapted to their place and function in the
whole (i.e. to the ends which they would serve in this whole). Rather, they tend
to be conceived as separately existent mechanical elements of a fixed nature.”
Here Bohm discerns two categories of causes—efficient and final, according to
the ancient classification introduced by Aristotle. Nature is full of phenomena based
on final causes, but unfortunately the science of physics (classical, relativistic or
quantum) is unable to incorporate them and represent them in some form of meaningful equations. What is even worse, physicists often do not recognize final causes
at all treating the relevant phenomena as they would be induced by efficient causes.
A nice example is the spontaneous symmetry breaking. Since it is believed that nothing in nature is spontaneous, physicists not seeing any explicit efficient cause, they