- #1
- 10,800
- 3,672
This thread is in response to another thread where the issue of what De-Broglie's interpretation says came up.
For reference here is a paper that details it:
http://aflb.ensmp.fr/AFLB-classiques/aflb124p001.pdf
It was posted that theory contains a singularity at the particle. But, as the reference points out, it is only like a singularity to a first approximation.
It was also posted that, in that interpretation, cohesion is lost when wave-function collapse occurred. I could not find anything on cohesion in the theory, but that was clarified to mean in phase.
But that leaves me scratching my head because the interpretation specifically states it remains constantly in phase with it. In fact on page 9 it is proved that must always be the case. But, since quantum objects are subject to constant observation all the time it would quickly loose any phase.
I pointed out the interpretation was similar to DBB. That was not thought to be correct because the wave-function isn't real in De-Brogloie.
I don't want to get into a fruitless semantic argument, but since they both have particles associated with waves that is the sense I mean it is similar.
Anyway if anyone wants to continue the discussion - feel free.
Thanks
Bill
For reference here is a paper that details it:
http://aflb.ensmp.fr/AFLB-classiques/aflb124p001.pdf
It was posted that theory contains a singularity at the particle. But, as the reference points out, it is only like a singularity to a first approximation.
It was also posted that, in that interpretation, cohesion is lost when wave-function collapse occurred. I could not find anything on cohesion in the theory, but that was clarified to mean in phase.
But that leaves me scratching my head because the interpretation specifically states it remains constantly in phase with it. In fact on page 9 it is proved that must always be the case. But, since quantum objects are subject to constant observation all the time it would quickly loose any phase.
I pointed out the interpretation was similar to DBB. That was not thought to be correct because the wave-function isn't real in De-Brogloie.
I don't want to get into a fruitless semantic argument, but since they both have particles associated with waves that is the sense I mean it is similar.
Anyway if anyone wants to continue the discussion - feel free.
Thanks
Bill
Last edited: