Delayed Choice Experiments and the Bohm Approach

TL;DR

This paper argues that the Bohm interpretation provides a local and consistent explanation for delayed choice experiments, countering claims of non-local energy transfer and aligning with standard quantum mechanics.

Contribution

It clarifies the correct application of the Bohm interpretation in delayed choice experiments, resolving apparent non-local energy transfer paradoxes.

Findings

Bohm interpretation offers a local explanation for experimental results.

Incorrect application of Bohm interpretation leads to perceived non-local effects.

Proper use of Bohm interpretation aligns with standard quantum mechanics explanations.

Abstract

The delayed choice experiments of the type introduced by Wheeler and extended by Englert, Scully, S\"ussmann and Walther [ESSW], and others, have formed a rich area for investigating the puzzling behaviour of particles undergoing quantum interference. The surprise provided by the original delayed choice experiment, led Wheeler to the conclusion that "no phenomenon is a phenomenon until it is an observed phenomenon", a radical explanation which implied that "the past has no existence except as it is recorded in the present". However Bohm, Dewdney and Hiley have shown that the Bohm interpretation gives a straightforward account of the behaviour of the particle without resorting to such a radical explanation. The subsequent modifications of this experiment led both Aharonov and Vaidman and [ESSW] to conclude that the resulting Bohm-type trajectories in these new situations produce unacceptable properties. For example, if a cavity is placed in one arm of the interferometer, it will be excited by a particle travelling down the {\em other} arm. In other words it is the particle that does {\em not} go through the cavity that gives up its energy! If this analysis is correct, this behaviour would be truly bizarre and could only be explained by an extreme non-local transfer of energy that is even stronger than that required in an EPR-type processes. In this paper we show that this conclusion is not correct and that if the Bohm interpretation is used correctly, it gives a {\em local} explanation, which actually corresponds exactly to the standard quantum mechanics explanation offered by Englert, Scully, S\"ussmann and Walther [ESSW].