Comment on "Bohmian mechanics with complex action: a new trajectory-based formulation of quantum mechanics" [J. Chem. Phys. 125, 231103 (2006)].

In a recent publication, Goldfarb et al. have proposed a new trajectory scheme to solve quantum problems: Bohmian mechanics with complex action BOMCA . According to these authors, their contribution represents “a novel formulation of Bohmian mechanics.” In our opinion, rather than a new formulation of Bohmian mechanics, the proposal of Goldfarb et al. consists of a novel quantum computational scheme, which is based on solving the complex trajectory equations resulting from an already known complex version of Bohmian dynamics. On the other hand, Goldfarb et al. also claimed that their numerical scheme describes “fully local complex quantum trajectories,” with the reward of a significantly higher degree of localization than in the conventional Bohmian mechanics by lowering the magnitude of the quantum potential. At least from a theoretical and interpretative point of view, we consider that it is very important to clarify what “fully local quantum trajectories” means. Bohmian mechanics is a nonlocal theory because standard quantum mechanics is a nonlocal theory. This nonlocality manifests via the presence of a quantum potential, and therefore the corresponding quantum trajectories will display features that reflect such nonlocality. Something similar should also occur for any trajectory-based approach that intends to be equivalent to standard quantum mechanics. In this Comment we would like to provide a general discussion on these two aspects arising from the work of Goldfarb et al., which can be of much interest to the Chemical Physics community. In particular, we would like to stress the special interest relying on how the term locality should be employed. The approach of Goldfarb et al. starts with the timedependent quantum Hamilton-Jacobi equation. This equation was considered by Leacock and Padgett in 1983 within the context of the quantum transformation theory as a way to obtain bound-state energy levels of quantum systems with no need to calculate the corresponding eigenfunctions. According to Leacock and Padgett, the quantum Hamilton-Jacobi equation can be either stated as a postulate as done by these authors or derived from the Schrödinger equation through a simple connection formula. In the second case, the quantum action corresponds to the complex phase of the wave function when the latter is expressed as a pure complex exponential function. This relationship allows one to pass straightforwardly from the quantum Hamilton-Jacobi formalism to the standard one in terms of the time-dependent Schrödinger and vice versa . Although both the Ansatz and the formulation used by Leacock and Padgett are similar to those considered in the standard quantum WKB semiclassical approximation, as pointed out by these authors, their approach conceptually differs from the WKB one. Within Bohmian mechanics, energy eigenstates present an inconvenience: they give rise to zero velocity fields. Hence, when particles are described by this type of states, they will remain steady motionless . To overcome this problem, Floyd and Faraggi and Matone developed timeindependent quantum Hamilton-Jacobi-like formulations starting from real bipolar Ansätze, though they did not claim full equivalence with standard quantum mechanics regarding their predictions. Later, John proposed a timedependent complex quantum trajectory formalism based on the same connection formula mentioned by Leacock and Padgett to study the dynamics associated with some simple analytical cases, such as the harmonic oscillator or the step barrier. This “modified de Broglie–Bohm approach to quantum mechanics,” as termed by John, is formally equivalent to the BOMCA formulation of Goldfarb et al. Nevertheless, we would like to specify that, due to the fundamental theoretical nature of John’s contribution, a separate calculation of the wave function is required in order to obtain the corresponding trajectories John makes use of the “guiding wave” idea from Bohmian mechanics . Meanwhile, in the version of Goldfarb et al. the modified de Broglie–Bohm approach is formulated in terms of a closed set of equations in the spirit of quantum hydrodynamical formalisms , which avoids the calculation of the wave functions, thus providing a new, practical use to such an approach. Furthermore, within the approach of Goldfarb et al., the expression for the quantum force happens to be typically much smaller than in standard Bohmian mechanics. On the other hand, we would also like to note that a related formulation has also been used by Chou and Wyatt, though they developed a different, novel numerical scheme to tackle the problem of bound-energy levels and scattering in one dimension. When trying to understand the quantum-classical correspondence from the perspective of a WKB-like formulation of Bohmian mechanics WKB-BM , Sanz and co-workers reached the complex quantum HamiltonJacobi equation the same year as John, but independently. The WKB-BM formulation constitutes an excellent, compreTHE JOURNAL OF CHEMICAL PHYSICS 127, 197101 2007