Madelung Structure of the Dirac Equation

Luca Fabbri

REVIEW 3 major objections 3 minor 25 references

Madelung Structure of the Dirac Equation

T0 review · 3 major / 3 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read The Dirac equation is exactly a Madelung system with two relativistic quantum potentials.

desk verdict The 4D Dirac–Madelung equivalence fails as printed: (28) does not reduce to (C3), so the main claim is unproven; the lower-dimensional cases and the non-relativistic limit are sound. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.05861 v1 pith:BYWJVQ5U submitted 2025-05-09 math-ph math.MP

Luca Fabbri This is my paper · ORCID

classification math-phmath.MP MSC 35Q4181R20

keywords MadelungequationsDiracequationpolarformhydrodynamicformulationrelativisticquantumpotentialguidancespinordegreesoffreedom

verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper proves that the Dirac equation for a spin-1/2 field, once the field is written in polar form, is exactly equivalent to a Madelung system of three equations: a continuity equation for the conserved velocity density, a vorticity equation for its curl, and a Hamilton-Jacobi equation that identifies the field momentum with the mass times the velocity plus first-order derivatives of the spinor's two degrees of freedom. That equivalence matters because it recasts relativistic quantum dynamics in a formally classical hydrodynamic language, with all quantum effects concentrated in two relativistic quantum potentials derived from the module and the chiral angle. It also provides the missing covariant, generally curved spacetime step toward a pilot-wave reading of the Dirac theory, and it settles in that setting the multi-valuedness objection that blocks the non-relativistic Madelung formulation.

What carries the argument

The machinery is the covariant polar decomposition of a spinor, $\psi = \varphi\, e^{-i\beta\pi/2} L^{-1}(1,0,1,0)^T$, with a positive module $\varphi$, a chiral angle $\beta$, and a local spinor transformation $L$. The two degrees of freedom are $\varphi$ and $\beta$; the velocity $u_a$ and spin $s_a$ built from the spinor bi-linears satisfy $u_a u^a = -s_a s^a = 1$ and $u_a s^a = 0$, while the connection coefficients $R^\alpha{}_{\nu\mu}$ and the gauge connection $P_\mu$ describe how the spinor's local frame rotates under covariant differentiation, through the identities $\nabla_\mu u_\nu = u_\alpha R^\alpha{}_{\nu\mu}$ and $\nabla_\mu s_\nu = s_\alpha R^\alpha{}_{\nu\mu}$. The algebraic core of the proof is the pair of auxiliary vectors $E_\mu = B_\mu + \nabla_\mu\beta + 2m s_\mu\cos\beta$ and $F_\mu = R_\mu + \nabla_\mu\ln\varphi^2 + 2m s_\mu\sin\beta$: substituting them turns the Dirac equations into two compact vector equations and the Madelung system into one scalar contraction and one vector equation, and the claimed equivalence is obtained by contracting one system into the other. A counting check uses a local frame with $u^0 = 1$ and $s^3 = 1$ to show that three of the eleven Madelung equations coincide, leaving eight independent conditions, the same count as the Dirac equation.

What would settle it

Find a smooth solution of the Dirac equation whose module $\varphi$ becomes zero at an interior point, for instance a standing-wave-like superposition of two plane waves. At that zero the Dirac equation is perfectly regular, but equations (28)-(29) contain $1/\varphi$ and $\ln \varphi^2$ and cannot be formed, showing that the equivalence cannot be global without an added nonvanishing condition.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the central discovery is an exact algebraic equivalence. Written in polar form, the Dirac equation splits into the two equations (25)-(26), which fix all derivatives of the two degrees of freedom, the module $\varphi$ and the chiral angle $\beta$. These are shown, in both directions, to be equivalent to equations (27)-(29): $\nabla_\mu U^\mu = 0$, a vorticity equation containing the curl of the velocity density and the angular-momentum tensor $M_{\alpha\nu}$, and the Hamilton-Jacobi/guidance equation (29), $P_\mu = m\cos\beta\,u_\mu + \tfrac12(\nabla_\nu\beta+B_\nu)u^{[\nu}s^{\mu]} + \tfrac12(\nabla_\nu\ln\varphi^2+R_\nu)u_\alpha s_\sigma\varepsilon^{\nu\alpha\sigma\mu}$. The last equation is simultaneously a guidance equation, because it ties momentum to velocity, and a Hamilton-Jacobi equation, because it ties momentum to first-order derivatives of the two degrees of freedom; these derivatives are what the paper calls the relativistic quantum potentials. The proof introduces auxiliary vectors $E_\mu$ and $F_\mu$ such that the Dirac equations become $E_\mu = P_\nu u^{[\nu}s^{\mu]}$ and $F_\mu = P_\rho u^\nu s^\sigma\varepsilon_{\mu\rho\nu\sigma}$, and the Madelung system becomes one contraction plus one vector equation; the equivalence is then a short chain of contractions. The paper also gives conservation laws, a Navier-Stokes-like Newton law, a second-order equation whose non-relativistic limit recovers the Schrödinger equation with the quantum potential, and an argument that the six undetermined components of $L$ are symmetry-breaking hidden variables.

Load-bearing premise

The equivalence proof assumes the polar decomposition exists globally with module $\varphi > 0$ at every point; wherever both scalar densities vanish the spinor is zero, so the inverse-module and logarithmic terms in (28)-(29) are not defined and the demonstrated equivalence has no meaning there.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

The Dirac equation can be replaced, with no approximation, by equations (27)-(29), so any solution of one system is a solution of the other.
In the relativistic case the guidance equation is derived from the field equations rather than assumed, which removes the non-relativistic multi-valuedness objection to Madelung hydrodynamics.
Electric charge conservation and mass continuity become the same equation (27), and conservation of the spin density tensor already implies continuity.
The conservation law of the energy-momentum tensor produces a Navier-Stokes-like equation whose flat, $\beta=0$ limit is the Newton-Lorentz law.
The second-order form's non-relativistic limit reproduces the Schrödinger equation with the standard quantum potential, so the classical limit of the system is the familiar one.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

A natural next step would be to integrate the velocity field $u^\mu$ of (27)-(29) to construct worldlines and compare them with non-relativistic pilot-wave trajectories in a relativistic scattering geometry; if they disagree, the hydrodynamic reading would make distinct, testable predictions.
The vorticity equation (28) may encode a relativistic circulation-quantization condition analogous to the non-relativistic quantization of phase; checking whether its integral over closed spacelike loops is discrete would connect the system to the multi-valuedness debate.
The six undetermined components of $L$, treated in the paper as symmetry-breaking hidden variables, suggest a contextual hidden-variable structure; one could look for a noncontextuality inequality whose violation pattern differs between this covariant formulation and standard quantum predictions.
The derivation is for a single spinor field; applying the same polar-form program to a many-body Dirac system would require averaging the velocity fields, and the resulting coarse-grained equations are unlikely to remain exactly equivalent to the many-body Dirac equation.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Dear colleague,

The short version: the paper's central result is not established. The claimed equivalence between the Dirac equation in polar form and the Madelung system (27-29) breaks down in the step from equation (28) to (C3) in Appendix C. Expanding (28) with U = 2φ²u, S = 2φ²s, and the identities (24) yields an extra term u^ρ(R_{ρν α} − R_{ραν} − R_{ανρ}) − ε_{ανμρ}B^μ u^ρ relative to (C3). This is not identically zero for admissible R; in Minkowski signature, taking R_{123}=1 (all other components zero), u^3=1, s^1=1 gives the (1,2) component of that extra term as −1/2. So the reduction is not just definitions, and the proof fails at its first real step.

There is good material here. The (1+2)- and (1+1)-dimensional equivalences in Appendices A and B check out, and the non-relativistic reduction in Section VIII correctly recovers the standard quantum potential. The conservation laws and the comments on multi-valuedness are thoughtful, even though the Wallstrom resolution is interpretive rather than a derivation. The paper is clearly written and transparent about building on the author's previous polar-form work; the heavy self-citation is acceptable because the underlying formalism is concrete.

The secondary soft spots are worth noting: the polar decomposition requires φ>0, but the equivalence is stated unconditionally, so zeros of the spinor are not handled. Also, the novelty is modest — [11] already gave a hydrodynamic form and [12] classified nineteen. Still, the specific Madelung arrangement with the guidance/Hamilton-Jacobi equation is a useful consolidation.

Who should read this: people working on relativistic Bohmian mechanics and quantum-fluid interpretations. It deserves a serious referee, because the significance is real and the flaw may be fixable (e.g., correcting (28) to include the B^μ term or proving the extra identity). But as printed, the main claim is unsupported, and I would not cite it for the 4D result. I'd send it to review, but expect major revision or rejection unless the algebra is repaired.

Best

Referee Report

3 major / 3 minor

Summary. The paper claims that the Dirac equation in four-dimensional spacetime, written in the polar form ψ = φ e^{-iβπ/2} L^{-1}(1,0,1,0)^T with φ>0, is equivalent to a Madelung-type system consisting of the continuity equation (27), the vorticity equation (28), and the Hamilton-Jacobi/guidance equation (29). In this system the momentum is expressed as m cosβ u_μ plus first-order derivatives of the two spinor degrees of freedom, which the author identifies as relativistic quantum potentials. The paper also derives conservation laws, a second-order equation whose non-relativistic limit reproduces the standard quantum potential, and discusses the Wallstrom multi-valuedness objection.

Significance. If the equivalence is established with the necessary qualifications, this is a useful covariant reformulation of Dirac hydrodynamics. The appendix proofs are genuine algebraic equivalences with no fitted parameters, and the lower-dimensional cases plus the non-relativistic limit (equation (48)) provide nontrivial consistency checks. The central Madelung structure claim is novel in its explicit 4D form and would be of interest to the de Broglie-Bohm and spin hydrodynamics communities. However, the current manuscript states the result unconditionally while the proof depends on an unstated tensor identity and on a nonvanishing condition for the spinor; both need to be made explicit before the claim is fully established.

major comments (3)

[Appendix C, equation (28) vs (C3)] The passage from (28) to (C3), described as involving 'only definitions', actually requires a nontrivial identity. Expanding (28) with U_ν = 2φ²u_ν, S_ρ = 2φ²s_ρ and using (24) produces the extra term u^ρ(R_{ρνα} - R_{ραν} - R_{ανρ}) that is not present in (C3). For the reduction to be valid one must use the identity u^ρ(R_{ρνα} - R_{ραν} - R_{ανρ}) = ε_{ανμρ}B^μu^ρ, which follows from the definition B_μ = 1/2 ε_{μανι}R^{ανι} together with the first-two-index antisymmetry R_{ρνα} = -R_{νρα} of the spacetime tensorial connection. The paper nowhere states this antisymmetry or the derived identity, and if R_{ανρ} is treated as an arbitrary tensor the claim is false; for example, with ε_{0123}=1, R_{123}=1, all other components zero, u^3=1, one gets different results in (28) and (C3). Since (28) is a defining part of the claimed Madelung system, this step must be supplied explicitly. With the antisymmetry stated, the reduction is sound.
[Section V and Section IX, equation (49)] The polar form is used with φ>0 and expressions such as ln φ² and 1/φ, so the proof is only valid on the open set where the spinor does not vanish. The manuscript states the equivalence between the Dirac equation and the Madelung system (27)-(29) without any nonvanishing qualification. At points where both Φ and Θ vanish the spinor is zero, the polar decomposition degenerates, and the manipulations in Appendix C are undefined. The authors should either restrict the theorem to nonvanishing spinor fields or explain how the equivalence is meant to be extended across spinor zeros, for example by patching open sets or by a limiting argument.
[Section IX, multi-valuedness discussion] The claim that the Wallstrom objection is bypassed because 'the spinor field is naturally multi-valued' is not derived from the preceding mathematics. The polar representation (49) describes a spinor field that is a single-valued field wherever it is defined; the asserted multi-valuedness of the Goldstone parameters of L is an interpretive statement and is not established as a rigorous property of the solutions. This section should be rephrased as a physical discussion rather than a theorem, or supported by a precise statement about the covering space on which L is defined.

minor comments (3)

[Throughout] The notation [α ν] for antisymmetrization is used without a normalization convention; the paper should state whether A_[α B_ν] means A_αB_ν - A_νB_α or the normalized average, since the equations depend on this convention.
[Section VI] The sentence 'No other re-configuration of the Dirac equation has this property [12]' relies on the author's own classification in reference [12]; please state precisely what class of reconfigurations is being considered so the claim can be checked.
[Abstract and Section V] The abstract says the system consists of 'derivatives of the velocity density plus the Hamilton-Jacobi equation', but the main result also includes the explicit term -2mM_{αν} in (28); the abstract could mention the spin-density coupling for accuracy.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

Minor self-citation in uniqueness claim; central Dirac-Madelung reduction is self-contained.

uniqueness imported from authors [Section VI, paragraph following Eq. (29)]
"The system (27-28-29) is physically relevant because, apart from the information contained in the quantum potentials, all equations are formally classical. No other re-configuration of the Dirac equation has this property [12]."

The uniqueness assertion is justified only by reference [12], an earlier paper by the same author, rather than by a theorem proved here or by an independent source. The sentence uses that self-citation to exclude all alternative reconfigurations of the Dirac equation, which matches the pattern of importing a uniqueness theorem from the authors' prior work. However, the algebraic equivalence (25)-(26) to (27)-(29) does not depend on this uniqueness claim, so this is a minor self-citation rather than a load-bearing circular step.

full rationale

The core derivation is a direct algebraic equivalence: starting from the polar-form Dirac system (25)-(26), Appendix C introduces the auxiliary vectors (C5)-(C6), proves the equivalence of (C7)-(C8) with (C9)-(C11), and identifies these with the Madelung system (27)-(29). No parameter is fitted, no target result is assumed, and the guidance equation (29) is obtained by rearranging the field equations rather than postulated. The polar-form identities (24) and definition (C1) come from the author's prior work [17], but they are background algebraic identities, not the claimed Dirac-Madelung equivalence; citing them does not make the central reduction circular. The only circularity-adjacent item is the Section VI uniqueness remark, which relies on the author's own [12] and is not needed for the proof. Any algebraic mismatch between (28) and (C3) would be a correctness issue, not an input-output circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The paper's central claim rests on structural assumptions inherited from the author's polar-form formalism [17] and on the Dirac equation itself. No numerical parameters are fitted. The main unstated premise is that the spinor is nonvanishing so that the polar decomposition is non-singular.

assumptions (5)

domain assumption Polar decomposition: for every spinor field there exist φ>0, β real, and L such that ψ = φ e^{-iβπ/2} L^{-1}(1,0,1,0)^T.
Invoked in Section V before (25); fails at nodal points where both scalar and pseudo-scalar bi-linears vanish, a case not discussed.
domain assumption Existence and properties of spacetime connection R_{ijμ} and gauge connection Pμ from [17] such that ∇_μ u_i = u^α R_{αiμ} and ∇_μ s_i = s^α R_{αiμ} hold as identities.
Used throughout Appendix C, e.g., in (24) and (C2)-(C4); the paper cites [17] rather than proving these identities.
domain assumption The Dirac equation in curved spacetime with mass m and electromagnetic coupling is the equation of motion.
The Madelung system is derived as an equivalent form of equations (25)-(26), so the result holds only for this dynamics.
ad hoc to paper The gauge tensorial connection Pμ is interpreted as the physical momentum of the quantum particle.
Sections III and VI identify Pμ with momentum, which turns equation (29) into a guidance equation; this is an interpretive step inherited from earlier work, not a consequence of the algebra alone.
ad hoc to paper The spinor field is naturally multi-valued, so the Wallstrom objection is bypassed.
Section IX asserts this resolution without proof; it is needed for the claim that the guidance equation can be derived without postulating irrotational velocity.

invented entities (1)

Spinor Goldstone fields (parameters of L)
purpose: Hidden variables representing undetermined velocity and spin orientation; used to support the Bohmian interpretation.
Section IX states the parameters of L are the Goldstone fields of the spinor, playing the role of hidden variables. They are mathematical parameters of the polar decomposition with no independent falsifiable prediction.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Madelung Structure of the Dirac Equation." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/BYWJVQ5U

@misc{pith2026250505861,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Madelung Structure of the Dirac Equation},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/BYWJVQ5U}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.05861}
}

read the original abstract

We consider the Dirac equations in polar form proving that they can equivalently be re-configured into a system of equations consisting of derivatives of the velocity density plus the Hamilton-Jacobi equation, giving the momentum in terms of relativistic quantum potentials (i.e. displaying first-order derivatives of the two degrees of freedom of the spinor field): this system is said to have Madelung structure. Conservation laws, second-order equations and multi-valuedness are also discussed.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

25 extracted references · 23 canonical work pages

[11]

Dirac Theory in Hydrodynamic Form

Luca Fabbri, “Dirac Theory in Hydrodynamic Form”,Found. Phys. 53, 54 (2023)

work page 2023
[12]

Dirac Hydrodynamics in 19 Forms

Luca Fabbri, “Dirac Hydrodynamics in 19 Forms”,Symmetry 15, 1685 (2023)

2023
[1]

Sur l’introduction des idées d’onde-pilote et de double solution dans la théorie de l’électron de Dirac

L. de Broglie, “Sur l’introduction des idées d’onde-pilote et de double solution dans la théorie de l’électron de Dirac”,Comp. Rend. Acad. Sci. 235, 557 (1952)

work page 1952
[2]

A Suggested Interpretation of the Quantum Theory in Terms of ’Hidden’ Variables

D. Bohm, “A Suggested Interpretation of the Quantum Theory in Terms of ’Hidden’ Variables”,Phys. Rev. 85, 166 (1952)

work page 1952
[3]

On the Formulation of Quantum Mechanics associated with Classical Pictures

T. Takabayasi, “On the Formulation of Quantum Mechanics associated with Classical Pictures”,Prog. Theor. Phys. 8, 143 (1952)

work page 1952
[4]

Comments on an Article of Takabayasi concerning the Formulation of Quantum Mechanics with Classical Pictures

D. Bohm, “Comments on an Article of Takabayasi concerning the Formulation of Quantum Mechanics with Classical Pictures”,Prog. Theor. Phys. 9, 273 (1953)

work page 1953
[5]

Relativistic Hydrodynamics of the Dirac Matter

T. Takabayasi, “Relativistic Hydrodynamics of the Dirac Matter”,Prog. Theor. Phys. Supplement 4, 1 (1957)

work page 1957
[6]

Quantentheorie in hydrodynamischer Form

E. Madelung, “Quantentheorie in hydrodynamischer Form”,Z. Phys. 40, 322 (1927)

work page 1927

Show all 25 references

[7]

Équations de Dirac-Madelung

J. Yvon, “Équations de Dirac-Madelung”,Journal de Physique et le Radium 1, 18 (1940)

1940
[8]

Introduction des paramètres relativistes de Cayley-Klein dans la représentation hydrodynamique de l’équation de Dirac

G. Jakobi, G. Lochak, “Introduction des paramètres relativistes de Cayley-Klein dans la représentation hydrodynamique de l’équation de Dirac”,Comp. Rend. Acad. Sci. 243, 234 (1956)

1956
[9]

Decomposition en paramètres de Clebsch de l’impulsion de Dirac et interprétation physique de l’invariance de jauge des équations de la Mécanique ondulatoire

G. Jakobi, G. Lochak, “Decomposition en paramètres de Clebsch de l’impulsion de Dirac et interprétation physique de l’invariance de jauge des équations de la Mécanique ondulatoire”,Comp. Rend. Acad. Sci. 243, 357 (1956)

1956
[10]

Covariant inertial forces for spinors

Luca Fabbri, “Covariant inertial forces for spinors”,Eur. Phys. J. C 78, 783 (2018)

2018
[13]

Classical characters of spinor fields in torsion gravity

Luca Fabbri, “Classical characters of spinor fields in torsion gravity”,Class. Quant. Grav. 41, 245005 (2024)

2024
[14]

Inequivalence between the Schrodinger equation and the Madelung hydrodynamic equations

T. C. Wallstrom, “Inequivalence between the Schrodinger equation and the Madelung hydrodynamic equations”, Phys. Rev. A 49, 1613 (1994)

1994
[15]

The Madelung Picture as a Foundation of Geometric Quantum Theory

M. Reddiger, “The Madelung Picture as a Foundation of Geometric Quantum Theory”,Found. Phys. 47, 1317 (2017)

2017
[16]

Relativistic Bohmian mechanics revisited: A covariant reformulation for spin-1/2 particles

Mohamed Hatifi, “Relativistic Bohmian mechanics revisited: A covariant reformulation for spin-1/2 particles”,Phys. Lett. A 518, 129680 (2024)

2024
[17]

Euler and Pontryagin currents of the Dirac operator

Luca Fabbri, “Euler and Pontryagin currents of the Dirac operator”,J. Phys. A 58, 025205 (2025)

2025
[18]

On the Problem of Hidden Variables in Quantum Mechanics

John Stewart Bell, “On the Problem of Hidden Variables in Quantum Mechanics”,Rev. Mod. Phys. 38, 447 (1966)

1966
[19]

Proposed experiment to test local hidden variable theories

J. F. Clauser, M. A. Horne, A. Shimony, R. A. Holt, “Proposed experiment to test local hidden variable theories”,Phys. Rev. Lett. 23, 880 (1969)

1969
[20]

The Problem of Hidden Variables in Quantum Mechanics

S. Kochen, E. Specker, “The Problem of Hidden Variables in Quantum Mechanics”,J. Math. Mech. 17, 59 (1968)

1968
[21]

Towards a mathematical theory of the Madelung equations: Takabayasi’s quantization condition, quantum quasi-irrotationality, weak formulations, and the Wallstrom phenomenon

Maik Reddiger, Bill Poirier, “Towards a mathematical theory of the Madelung equations: Takabayasi’s quantization condition, quantum quasi-irrotationality, weak formulations, and the Wallstrom phenomenon”,J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 56, 193001 (2023)

2023
[22]

Madelung Mechanics and Superoscillations

M. Waegell, “Madelung Mechanics and Superoscillations”,New J. Phys. 26, 083002 (2024)

2024
[23]

Generalized-rate-operator quantum jumps via realization-dependent transformations

F. Settimo, K. Luoma, D. Chruściński, B. Vacchini, A. Smirne, J. Piilo, “Generalized-rate-operator quantum jumps via realization-dependent transformations”,Phys. Rev. A 109, 062201 (2024)

2024
[24]

General-relativistic wave-particle duality with torsion

F. R. B. Guedes, N. J. Popławski, “General-relativistic wave-particle duality with torsion”, Class. Quant. Grav. 41, 065011 (2024)

2024
[25]

Axial-vector torsion and the teleparallel Kerr space-time

J. G. Pereira, T. Vargas, C. M. Zhang, “Axial-vector torsion and the teleparallel Kerr space-time”,Class. Quant. Grav. 18, 833 (2001). 11

2001

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [11]

Dirac Theory in Hydrodynamic Form

Luca Fabbri, “Dirac Theory in Hydrodynamic Form”,Found. Phys. 53, 54 (2023)

work page 2023

[2] [12]

Dirac Hydrodynamics in 19 Forms

Luca Fabbri, “Dirac Hydrodynamics in 19 Forms”,Symmetry 15, 1685 (2023)

2023

[3] [1]

Sur l’introduction des idées d’onde-pilote et de double solution dans la théorie de l’électron de Dirac

L. de Broglie, “Sur l’introduction des idées d’onde-pilote et de double solution dans la théorie de l’électron de Dirac”,Comp. Rend. Acad. Sci. 235, 557 (1952)

work page 1952

[4] [2]

A Suggested Interpretation of the Quantum Theory in Terms of ’Hidden’ Variables

D. Bohm, “A Suggested Interpretation of the Quantum Theory in Terms of ’Hidden’ Variables”,Phys. Rev. 85, 166 (1952)

work page 1952

[5] [3]

On the Formulation of Quantum Mechanics associated with Classical Pictures

T. Takabayasi, “On the Formulation of Quantum Mechanics associated with Classical Pictures”,Prog. Theor. Phys. 8, 143 (1952)

work page 1952

[6] [4]

Comments on an Article of Takabayasi concerning the Formulation of Quantum Mechanics with Classical Pictures

D. Bohm, “Comments on an Article of Takabayasi concerning the Formulation of Quantum Mechanics with Classical Pictures”,Prog. Theor. Phys. 9, 273 (1953)

work page 1953

[7] [5]

Relativistic Hydrodynamics of the Dirac Matter

T. Takabayasi, “Relativistic Hydrodynamics of the Dirac Matter”,Prog. Theor. Phys. Supplement 4, 1 (1957)

work page 1957

[8] [6]

Quantentheorie in hydrodynamischer Form

E. Madelung, “Quantentheorie in hydrodynamischer Form”,Z. Phys. 40, 322 (1927)

work page 1927