Quick Navigation

Topics

Open Quantum Systems Decoherence

Formal equivalence between Maxwell equations and the de Broglie-Bohm theory for two-dimensional optical microcavities

arXiv
Authors: Aurélien Drezet, Bernard Michael Nabet

Year

2025

Paper ID

16386

Status

Preprint

Abstract Read

~2 min

Abstract Words

101

Citations

N/A

Abstract

We analyze the formal equivalence between the electromagnetic energy conservation law derived from Maxwell's equations in an optical microcavity and the conservation of a probability fluid associated with the de Broglie-Bohm theory for an effective massive particle describing a photon in this cavity. This work is part of a critical analysis of recent experiments \[Nature 643, 67-72 (2025)\] carried out with a view to refuting the de Broglie-Bohm theory. Furthermore, the consequences of our analysis for microphotonics go far beyond these experiments. In particular, extensions that take into account photon spin and stochastic aspects associated with radiative or absorption losses are considered.

Why This Paper Matters

  • This paper contributes to the Open Quantum Systems & Decoherence research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
  • It adds a 2025 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
  • We analyze the formal equivalence between the electromagnetic energy conservation law derived from Maxwell's equations in an optical microcavity and the conservation of a...

Paper Tools

Become a member to use research tools

Sign in to open papers, visit source links, share, cite, compare, copy DOI links, request category corrections, and build your reading list.

Show Paper arXiv Publisher Share Cite This Paper Copy URL Compare Copy DOI Add to Reading List Category Correction Request

References & Citation Signals

Local Citation Graph (Related-Paper Links)

Current Paper #16386

External citation index: OpenAlex citation signal

Community Reactions

Quick sentiment from readers on this paper.

Score: 0
Likes: 0 Dislikes: 0

Sign in to react to this paper.

Discussion & Reviews (Moderated)

Average Rating: 0.0 / 5 (0 ratings)

No written reviews yet.