David Bohm's Metaphysical views of Quantum Physics

  1. Philosophy Forum
  2. » Metaphysics
  3. » David Bohm's Metaphysical views of Quantum Physics

Get Email Updates Email this Topic Print this Page

richrf
 
Reply Sun 9 Aug, 2009 09:52 pm
Hi,

I am reading On Creativity, by David Bohm. Bohm was a very well known physicist who had exchanged ideas about quantum physics with Bohr and Einstein and came up with his own interpretation. I thought a brief summary might be interesting for discussion, since it relates to Eastern philosophy and attempts to explain the meaning of Quantum Physics. So here is a brief summary extracted from the book:

1) Quantum mechanics gives no picture, no notion of what processes are happening. It merely talks about the results of measurements and observations.

2) His idea what might be the process he calls enfoldment. The mathematics itself suggest a movement in which everything, and particular element of space, may have a field which unfolds into the whole and the whole enfolds it in it. An example would be a hologram in which the entire object is contained in each region of the hologram, enfolded as a pattern of waves, which can then be unfolded by shining light through it.

3) The enfolding he calls the implicate order and the unfolding he calls the explicate order. The theory does not change the mathematics of quantum theory. It only seeks to explain the underlying process.

4) The enfolded order is a vast range of potentiality, which can be unfolded. The way it unfolds depends upon many factors including how we think. In participation, we bring out potentials which are incomplete in themselves, but it is only in the whole that the thing is complete. We act according to our consciousness of them.

5) He feels that mathematics has been overly emphasized in modern science. It does give a certain precision but at the cost of becoming a rather limited conceptual structure.

Rich
 
ACB
 
Reply Sun 23 Aug, 2009 06:55 am
@richrf,
richrf;82227 wrote:
4) The enfolded order is a vast range of potentiality, which can be unfolded. The way it unfolds depends upon many factors including how we think. In participation, we bring out potentials which are incomplete in themselves, but it is only in the whole that the thing is complete. We act according to our consciousness of them.

5) He feels that mathematics has been overly emphasized in modern science. It does give a certain precision but at the cost of becoming a rather limited conceptual structure.

Rich


A few questions:

1. Is the unfolding an objective physical process (something that could be measured), or is it just a subjective attitude, a way of thinking? In other words, are the pattern and extent of the unfolding a single intersubjective reality, or are they different for each individual person?

2. Is the amount of unfolding quantifiable in principle? Is it ever actually 'completed'?

3. How is the enfolded order knowable?
 
KaseiJin
 
Reply Sun 23 Aug, 2009 07:16 am
@richrf,
I just wish to express gratitude for your having started this thread, richrf, because while I do have material on that field, I simply do not have to time to study it all much at all. For that reason, therefore, I do not have time to cross reference or double check on anything that I cannot find in my limited resource material.

At the moment I do tend to feel (and please do notice the word choice here, not 'reason,' not even 'think,' but rather 'feel') that Bohm's interpretation is a bit off somehow (recall my #355 on the consciousness is a biological problem thread) but will have to look more directly into it a bit; and this will surely be allowing me a degree of chance to do so. I may not post here, but I'm sure that'll be ok too. (but if I see something more evidently inaccurate, or misrepresntated, I may well post to correct or adjust it)

KJ
 
richrf
 
Reply Sun 23 Aug, 2009 08:09 am
@ACB,
ACB;85131 wrote:
A few questions:

1. Is the unfolding an objective physical process (something that could be measured), or is it just a subjective attitude, a way of thinking? In other words, are the pattern and extent of the unfolding a single intersubjective reality, or are they different for each individual person?

2. Is the amount of unfolding quantifiable in principle? Is it ever actually 'completed'?

3. How is the enfolded order knowable?


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Implicate_and_Explicate_Order_according_to_David_Bohm

Wikipedia gives an excellent overview of the Bohm's conception. He arrived at this thought experiment while trying to come up with a conceptual model that would embrace Quantum Physics and Relativity. He began with de Broglie's model and added some of his own thoughts. Conceptually it is straightforward, and if you read his early books in the order that he wrote them, it gives you a good idea of how he arrived at this conceptual model.

Rich

---------- Post added 08-23-2009 at 09:12 AM ----------

KaseiJin;85132 wrote:
I just wish to express gratitude for your having started this thread, richrf, because while I do have material on that field, I simply do not have to time to study it all much at all. For that reason, therefore, I do not have time to cross reference or double check on anything that I cannot find in my limited resource material.

At the moment I do tend to feel (and please do notice the word choice here, not 'reason,' not even 'think,' but rather 'feel') that Bohm's interpretation is a bit off somehow (recall my #355 on the consciousness is a biological problem thread) but will have to look more directly into it a bit; and this will surely be allowing me a degree of chance to do so. I may not post here, but I'm sure that'll be ok too. (but if I see something more evidently inaccurate, or misrepresntated, I may well post to correct or adjust it)

KJ


Please do. You might want to begin your research with the de Broglie model, which Einstein actually preferred, because this is the starting point for Bohm. His ideas changed over his life, but his early works on Quantum Mechanics, gives ideas on why he was uncomfortable with the Copenhagen conception.

Rich
 
 

 
  1. Philosophy Forum
  2. » Metaphysics
  3. » David Bohm's Metaphysical views of Quantum Physics
Copyright © 2022 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.02 seconds on 08/12/2022 at 06:35:05