{"title":"Orthodox or dissident? The evolution of Bohm’s ontological reflections in the 1950s","authors":"Andrea Oldofredi","doi":"10.1140/epjh/s13129-023-00062-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>David Bohm has often been considered unable to understand the meaning of the quantum revolution as well as its radical metaphysical implications. Similarly, his pilot-wave theory was negatively portrayed as an attempt to restore a classical and deterministic <i>Weltanschauung</i>. Against this background, the aim of this paper is twofold: in the first place, it will be argued that the accusations of dogmatism advanced by several eminent physicists <i>contra</i> Bohm show a biased understanding of his works. Referring to this, two case studies will be discussed: the Bohm–Pauli correspondence, and the difficult relationship between the former and Leon Rosenfeld, a fervent supporter of Bohr’s philosophy of complementarity. These examples indicate that the opposition to the pilot-wave approach was for the most part not based on scientific grounds. In the second place, I will reconstruct and analyze the evolution of Bohm’s philosophical reflections about ontology, scientific realism and pluralism studying private correspondences as well as his main works in the fifties culminated in the book <i>Causality and Chance in Modern Physics</i>. Underlining the originality of Bohm’s thoughts, it will be concluded that his perspective can be characterized as a form of internal realism.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":791,"journal":{"name":"The European Physical Journal H","volume":"48 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The European Physical Journal H","FirstCategoryId":"4","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1140/epjh/s13129-023-00062-3","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"物理与天体物理","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
David Bohm has often been considered unable to understand the meaning of the quantum revolution as well as its radical metaphysical implications. Similarly, his pilot-wave theory was negatively portrayed as an attempt to restore a classical and deterministic Weltanschauung. Against this background, the aim of this paper is twofold: in the first place, it will be argued that the accusations of dogmatism advanced by several eminent physicists contra Bohm show a biased understanding of his works. Referring to this, two case studies will be discussed: the Bohm–Pauli correspondence, and the difficult relationship between the former and Leon Rosenfeld, a fervent supporter of Bohr’s philosophy of complementarity. These examples indicate that the opposition to the pilot-wave approach was for the most part not based on scientific grounds. In the second place, I will reconstruct and analyze the evolution of Bohm’s philosophical reflections about ontology, scientific realism and pluralism studying private correspondences as well as his main works in the fifties culminated in the book Causality and Chance in Modern Physics. Underlining the originality of Bohm’s thoughts, it will be concluded that his perspective can be characterized as a form of internal realism.
期刊介绍:
The purpose of this journal is to catalyse, foster, and disseminate an awareness and understanding of the historical development of ideas in contemporary physics, and more generally, ideas about how Nature works.
The scope explicitly includes:
- Contributions addressing the history of physics and of physical ideas and concepts, the interplay of physics and mathematics as well as the natural sciences, and the history and philosophy of sciences, together with discussions of experimental ideas and designs - inasmuch as they clearly relate, and preferably add, to the understanding of modern physics.
- Annotated and/or contextual translations of relevant foreign-language texts.
- Careful characterisations of old and/or abandoned ideas including past mistakes and false leads, thereby helping working physicists to assess how compelling contemporary ideas may turn out to be in future, i.e. with hindsight.