Comment on "Association between quantum paradoxes based on weak values and a realistic interpretation of quantum measurements"

TL;DR

This paper critiques a previous argument claiming that realistic interpretations of weak values are inconsistent, demonstrating that such inconsistencies are not universal and can be addressed within Bohmian mechanics.

Contribution

It refutes the general argument against realistic interpretations of weak values by providing a counterexample using Bohmian mechanics.

Findings

Bohmian mechanics can interpret position-based weak values consistently.

The previous argument's formal proof is shown to be incorrect.

Weak values can represent properties of quantum systems independently of measurement.

Abstract

In their paper (arXiv:2402.09879), Aredes and Saldanha analyze several paradoxes related to weak values and present a "general argument" that aims to show that "realistic interpretations ...of weak values lead to inconsistencies". Although we agree with the identified inconsistencies for the specific weak values analyzed there, in this Comment we demonstrate that the origin of these inconsistencies is not their general argument, which is formally incorrect. We use Bohmian mechanics as a counterexample to confirm that their conclusions are not valid for all weak values and quantum theories. In particular, we show that weak values postselected in position can in fact be interpreted within Bohmian mechanics as properties of quantum systems, detached from any measuring devices, in a consistent and meaningful way.