Bohmian mechanics and explanation: the case of the interpretation of the wave function
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.35588/cc.v6d7927Keywords:
Bohmian mechanics, scientific explanation, wave function, explanatory power, nomological interpretationAbstract
In this article, we address the question of whether Bohmian mechanics provides a scientific explanation of phenomena and whether its explanatory power depends on the chosen interpretation of the theory. More particularly, we focus on the debate concerning the nature of the wave function, considering three interpretations: (i) that it represents a physical field; (ii) that it is an aspect of the particles’ law of motion; and (iii) that it represents a dispositional property of the particles. In a recent paper, Esfeld et al. (2014) consider these three alternatives, arguing that the dispositional interpretation is superior in explanatory terms. For our analysis, we use Díez’s (2014), according to which scientific explanations are instances of ampliative and specialized nomological embeddings. We conclude that Bohmian mechanics is explanatory and that its capacity to provide an adequate scientific explanation of phenomena does not depend on the interpretation of the theory, clarifying how alleged differences in explanatory power, such as those invoked by Esfeld et al. (2014), should be understood.
Downloads
References
Balzer, W., & Moulines, C. U. (1981). Die Grundstruktur der klassischen Partikelmechanik und ihre Spezialfsierungen. Zeitschrift für Naturforschung A, 36(6), 600−608.
______(1998). Structuralist theory of science: Paradigmatic reconstructions. Amsterdam: Rodopi.
Balzer, W., Moulines, C. U., & Sneed, J. D. (1987). An architectonic for science: The structuralist program (Vol. 186). Springer Science & Business Media.
Bell, J.S. (1987). Speakable and Unspeakable in Quantum Mechanics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Belot, Gordon (2012). Quantum states for primitive ontologists. A case study. European Journal for Philosophy of Science, 2, 67−83.
Bohm, D. (1952). A Suggested Interpretation of the Quantum Theory in Terms of ‘Hidden’ Variables I and II. Physical Review 85, 166–193.
Bohm, D., & Hiley, B.J. (1993). The Undivided Universe: An Ontological Interpretation of Quantum Theory. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Brown, H. R. & Wallace, D. (2005). Solving the Measurement Problem: de Broglie-Bohm Loses Out to Everett. Foundations of Physics, 35, 517–540.
Callender, C. (2015). One world, one beable. Synthese 192, 3153−3177.
Díez, J. A. (2014). Scientific explanation as ampliative, specialized embedding: a neo-Hempelian account. Erkenntnis, 79, 413–1443.
Díez, J. A. & Lorenzano, P. (2013). Who Got What Wrong? Fodor and Piattelli on Darwin: Guiding-principles and Explanatory Models in Natural Selection, Erkenntnis 78/5, pp. 1143–1175.
Dürr, D., Goldstein, S., & Zanghi, N. (1997). Bohmian mechanics and the meaning of the wave function. En R. S. Cohen, M. Horne, & J. Stachel (Eds.), Experimental metaphysics: Quantum mechanical studies for Abner Shimony (pp. 25–38). Springer.
Esfeld, M. (2020). Super-Humeanism: The Canberra Plan for Physics. En Glick, D., Darby, G., & Marmodoro, A., (Eds), The Foundation of Reality: Fundamentality, Space, and Time, (pp. 125−138). Oxford University Press.
Esfeld, M., & Deckert, D. (2018). A minimalist ontology of the natural world. New York: Routledge.
Esfeld, M., Lazarovici, D., Hubert, M., & Dürr, D. (2014). The ontology of Bohmian mechanics. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 65, 773–796.
Goldstein, S., & Zanghi, N. (2013). Reality and the role of the wave function in quantum theory. En Ney, A. & Albert, D. (Eds.), The wavefunction: Essays on the metaphysics of quantum mechanics (pp. 91–109). Oxford University Press.
Heisenberg, W. 1955. The development of the interpretation of the quantum theory. En Pauli, W. (Ed.), Niels Bohr and the Development of Physics: Essays Dedicated to Niels Bohr on the Occasion of his Seventieth Birthday (pp. 12–29). McGraw-Hill.
Holland, P.R. (1993). The Quantum Theory of Motion: An Account of the De Broglie-Bohm Causal Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kuhn, T. S. (1974). Second Thoughts on Paradigms. En F. Suppe (Ed.), The Structure of Scientific Theories (pp. 459–482). University of Illinois Press.
Lazarovici, D. (2018). Super-Humeanism: A starving ontology. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics, 64, 79−86.
Lewis, D. (1996). Philosophical Papers, Volume 2. Oxford University Press.
Lewis, P. (2007). How Bohm’s Theory Solves the Measurement Problem. Philosophy of Science, 74(5), pp. 749–760.
Moulines, C. U. (1984). Existential quantifiers and guiding-principles in physical theories. En J. Gracia, E. Rabossi, E. Villanueva, & M. Dascal (Eds.), Philosophical analysis in Latin America (pp. 173–198). Dordrecht: Reidel.
Oriols, X., & Mompart, J. (2019). Applied Bohmian Mechanics: From Nanoscale Systems to Cosmology. Jenny Stanford Publishing.
Philippidis, C., Bohm, D. & Kaye, R. D. (1982). The Aharonov-Bohm effect and the quantum potential. Nuovo Cimento, 7lB, 75–88.
Solé, A. & Hoefer, C. (2019). The nomological interpretation of the wave function. En Cordero, A., (Ed.), Philosophers Look at Quantum Mechanics (Synthese Library Series), Volume 406 (pp. 119–138). Springer Nature.
Suárez, M. (2015). Bohmian dispositions. Synthese, 192, 3203–3228.
Valentini, A., (1992). On the Pilot-Wave Theory of Classical, Quantum and Subquantum Physics Ph.D. Dissertation, ISAS – International School for Advanced Studies, Trieste.
Downloads
Submitted
2026-01-20Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Albert Solé, José A. Díez
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
