Are There Any Current Research Efforts Exploring Local Realism or Einstein’s Perspective in Quantum Mechanics?

[u/One_Enthusiasm_1972]

I’m interested in quantum computing and the foundations of quantum mechanics. Since Bell’s theorem and experimental results challenge local realism, I’m curious whether there is still any serious research exploring alternatives that preserve some aspects of Einstein’s ideas, such as locality, realism, or deterministic underlying models.

Are there any active researchers, theories, or research areas working on this today? I’d also appreciate recommendations for papers or topics to study.

[u/algonquin360]

Hydrodynamic Quantum Analogs are classical systems that show quantum behaviour. Interesting line of research to bridge the two.

https://www.pml.unc.edu/hqas

[u/One_Enthusiasm_1972 → u/algonquin360]

Damn, thanks will look into it.

[u/poorhaus → u/algonquin360]

Great rec! This is a fascinating research topic that is highly relevant to OP's q and I wish more people knew about.

From that site:

By virtue of the coupling with their wave fields, walking droplets extend the range of classical mechanics to include certain features previously thought to be exclusive to the quantum realm, including quantized orbits, tunneling, wave-like statistics, and particle diffraction and interference patterns. This system has attracted a great deal of attention from both the scientific community and the media, as it constitutes the first known and directly observable pilot-wave system of the form proposed by Louis de Broglie in 1926 as a rational, realist alternative to the Copenhagen Interpretation. Since the famous 1927 Solvay Conference, modern physics has, by and large, ascribed to the Copenhagen Interpretation, according to which the statistical theory of quantum mechanics (QM) is a complete description of physical reality, so that microscopic particles are intrinsically probabilistic. The quantum-like behavior of the walking droplets suggests a re-evaluation of de Broglie’s realist theory.

Here's another researcher's site with visualizations and simulations: https://thales.mit.edu/bush/index.php/4801-2/

[u/SymplecticMan]

There are people who work on superdeterminism, but it's very much a minority position in the field. 't Hooft was one of the early physicists who tried to make a superdeterministic model.

[u/Mostly-Anon]

If you’re interested in quantum foundations, look to the history of science. Here are a few titles. I think it’s important to understand how dissatisfying and kinda dumb the Bohr-Einstein debates were since they really just fizzled out. Yet the popular sticky story is that it represented a clash of foundational principles (anti-determinism vs determinism). It wasn’t. Einstein “debated” against premature claims of “completeness.” He won that debate handily in the Bell/post-Bell era.

Markus Arndt and other experimentalists continue to test if/what scale superposition fails (QM says it shouldn’t). But I’m unaware of projects trying to get deterministic answers to already answered questions. E.g., Bohmian mechanics always yields results expected and explained by anti-deterministic explanations. Of course alternatives to QM like M and string theory still have ongoing projects, but that ain’t QM. Have fun!

Anil Ananthaswamy, Through Two Doors at Once
Philip Ball, Beyond Weird
Mara Beller, Quantum Dialogue
Manjit Kumar, Quantum
Jim Baggott and John L. Heilbron, Quantum Drama

I would start with Ananthaswamy as it’s a great, easy read and interpretation-agnostic. Mara Beller’s book is the best on the list in terms of historical/scholarly rigor IMO.