I thought the images were old school POVRay renders. Turns out they have a visualisation setup, and they&#x27;re real pictures!<p>Video:<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;gfm.aps.org&#x2F;meetings&#x2F;dfd-2015&#x2F;55f71c7b69702d060d750500" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;gfm.aps.org&#x2F;meetings&#x2F;dfd-2015&#x2F;55f71c7b69702d060d7505...</a><p>Paper:<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;thales.mit.edu&#x2F;bush&#x2F;wp-content&#x2F;uploads&#x2F;2017&#x2F;01&#x2F;GFM-PW-2016.pdf" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;thales.mit.edu&#x2F;bush&#x2F;wp-content&#x2F;uploads&#x2F;2017&#x2F;01&#x2F;GFM-P...</a>

Bohm interpretation is not compatible with relativity. One can argue that Copenhagen interpretation is also not compatible, but then from practical purposes both interpretations are equivalent and predict the same results so why bother with changing explanations when the new one still does not address the fundamental problem.

It&#x27;s a real shame that de Broglie Bohm theory gets so little attention compared with the mainstream interpretation.