• Register
PhysicsOverflow is a next-generation academic platform for physicists and astronomers, including a community peer review system and a postgraduate-level discussion forum analogous to MathOverflow.

Welcome to PhysicsOverflow! PhysicsOverflow is an open platform for community peer review and graduate-level Physics discussion.

Please help promote PhysicsOverflow ads elsewhere if you like it.


PO is now at the Physics Department of Bielefeld University!

New printer friendly PO pages!

Migration to Bielefeld University was successful!

Please vote for this year's PhysicsOverflow ads!

Please do help out in categorising submissions. Submit a paper to PhysicsOverflow!

... see more

Tools for paper authors

Submit paper
Claim Paper Authorship

Tools for SE users

Search User
Reclaim SE Account
Request Account Merger
Nativise imported posts
Claim post (deleted users)
Import SE post

Users whose questions have been imported from Physics Stack Exchange, Theoretical Physics Stack Exchange, or any other Stack Exchange site are kindly requested to reclaim their account and not to register as a new user.

Public \(\beta\) tools

Report a bug with a feature
Request a new functionality
404 page design
Send feedback


(propose a free ad)

Site Statistics

205 submissions , 163 unreviewed
5,054 questions , 2,207 unanswered
5,347 answers , 22,720 comments
1,470 users with positive rep
818 active unimported users
More ...

  Should we have a bohmian mechanics tag?

+ 0 like - 0 dislike

The question Quasiparticles in Bohmian mechanics led me to ask the question in the title.

Should there be tags like for individual interpretations of quantum mechanics, or should there be an umbrella tag for questions that are about interpretations?

This post has been migrated from (A51.SE)
asked Oct 6, 2011 in SE.TP.discussion by Willie Wong (580 points) [ no revision ]
retagged Mar 7, 2014 by dimension10

1 Answer

+ 3 like - 0 dislike

In my opinion - no (neither I would add ). And anyway, for now the tag would be to specific.

Moreover, the question itself seems to me rather suited for physics.SE (as I don't see its really research-level, just someone curious about an interpretation/theory).

However, a tag (or just for use in + ) would be useful IMHO.

This post has been migrated from (A51.SE)
answered Oct 6, 2011 by Piotr Migdal (1,260 points) [ no revision ]
Well, about the question not being research level: it does not look trivial to me, esp. since I don't even know what's the status of the bohmian approach to quantum _many-body_ systems (I mean, the topic is quasi-particles, right?). But that's maybe very well-known, and I'm just too ignorant about this stuff... In any case, I don't think it's just philosophy, and it seems at least as good as several others I've seen on this site...

This post has been migrated from (A51.SE)
@YvanVelenik: It was the reason why I refrained from downvoting the question or redirected it to physics.SE.

This post has been migrated from (A51.SE)

Your answer

Please use answers only to (at least partly) answer questions. To comment, discuss, or ask for clarification, leave a comment instead.
To mask links under text, please type your text, highlight it, and click the "link" button. You can then enter your link URL.
Please consult the FAQ for as to how to format your post.
This is the answer box; if you want to write a comment instead, please use the 'add comment' button.
Live preview (may slow down editor)   Preview
Your name to display (optional):
Privacy: Your email address will only be used for sending these notifications.
Anti-spam verification:
If you are a human please identify the position of the character covered by the symbol $\varnothing$ in the following word:
Then drag the red bullet below over the corresponding character of our banner. When you drop it there, the bullet changes to green (on slow internet connections after a few seconds).
Please complete the anti-spam verification

user contributions licensed under cc by-sa 3.0 with attribution required

Your rights