Editing David Bohm (section)

== Work and doctorate ==
{{Moresources | section|date=April 2024}}
=== Manhattan Project contributions ===
During [[World War II]], the [[Manhattan Project]] mobilized much of Berkeley's physics research in the effort to produce the first [[atomic bomb]]. Though Oppenheimer had asked Bohm to work with him at [[Los Alamos National Laboratory|Los Alamos]] (the top-secret laboratory established in 1942 to design the atom bomb), the project's director, [[Brigadier General (United States)|Brigadier General]] [[Leslie Groves]], would not approve Bohm's security clearance after seeing evidence of his politics and his close friendship with Weinberg, who had been suspected of [[espionage]].

During the war, Bohm remained at Berkeley, where he taught physics and conducted research in [[plasma (physics)|plasma]], the [[synchrotron]] and the [[synchrocyclotron]]. He completed his [[PhD]] in 1943 by an unusual circumstance. According to biographer [[F. David Peat]],<ref>Peat 1997, p. 64</ref> "The scattering calculations (of collisions of protons and deuterons) that he had completed proved useful to the Manhattan Project and were immediately classified. Without security clearance, Bohm was denied access to his own work; not only would he be barred from defending his thesis, he was not even allowed to write his own thesis in the first place!" To satisfy the University, Oppenheimer certified that Bohm had successfully completed the research. Bohm later performed theoretical calculations for the [[Calutron]]s at the [[Y-12 National Security Complex|Y-12]] facility in [[Oak Ridge, Tennessee]]. These calculations were used for the [[Isotope separation#Electromagnetic|electromagnetic enrichment of uranium]] for the bomb dropped on [[Hiroshima]] in 1945.

=== McCarthyism and leaving the United States ===
After the war, Bohm became an assistant professor at [[Princeton University]]. He also worked closely with [[Albert Einstein]] at the nearby [[Institute for Advanced Study]]. In May 1949, the [[House Un-American Activities Committee]] called upon Bohm to testify because of his previous ties to unionism and suspected communists. Bohm invoked his [[Fifth amendment rights of witness|Fifth Amendment]] right to refuse to testify, and he refused to give evidence against his colleagues.

In 1950, Bohm was arrested for refusing to answer the committee's questions. He was acquitted in May 1951, but Princeton had already suspended him. After his acquittal, Bohm's colleagues sought to have him reinstated at Princeton, but Princeton President [[Harold W. Dodds]]<ref>Russell Olwell: [http://web.mit.edu/sts/pubs/pdfs/MIT_STS_WorkingPaper_20_Olwell.pdf ''Physics and Politics in Cold War America: The Two Exiles of David Bohm''], Working Paper Number 20. Program in Science, Technology, and Society. Massachusetts Institute of Technology.</ref> decided not to renew Bohm's contract. Although Einstein considered appointing him as his research assistant at the Institute, Oppenheimer (who had served as the Institute's president since 1947) "opposed the idea and [...] advised his former student to leave the country".<ref>{{Cite book | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=1TutRoSE2XcC&q=bohm+einstein+oppenheimer&pg=PR130 |title = Quantum: Einstein, Bohr, and the Great Debate about the Nature of Reality |isbn = 978-0-393-08009-4 |last1 = Kumar |first1 = Manjit |date = 2010-05-24|publisher = W. W. Norton & Company }}</ref> His request to go to the [[University of Manchester]] received Einstein's support but was unsuccessful.<ref>Albert Einstein to Patrick Blackett, 17 April 1951 (Albert Einstein archives). Cited after [[Olival Freire, Jr.]]: ''[http://www.controversia.fis.ufba.br/index_arquivos/Freire-Bohm-HSPS.pdf Science and Exile: David Bohm, the cold war, and a new interpretation of quantum mechanics]'', HSPS, vol.&nbsp;36, Part&nbsp;1, pp.&nbsp;1–34, ISSN 0890-9997, 2005, see footnote&nbsp;8. {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120326192406/http://www.controversia.fis.ufba.br/index_arquivos/Freire-Bohm-HSPS.pdf |date=26 March 2012 }}.</ref> Bohm then left for Brazil to assume a professorship of physics at the [[University of São Paulo]], at [[Jayme Tiomno]]'s invitation and on the recommendation of both Einstein and Oppenheimer.

=== Quantum theory and Bohm diffusion ===
{{main|Bohm diffusion|De Broglie–Bohm theory}}
[[File:doppelspalt.svg|thumb|180px|The Bohmian trajectories for an electron going through the two-slit experiment. A similar pattern was also observed for single photons.<ref>[https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.1202218 Observing the Average Trajectories of Single Photons in a Two-Slit Interferometer].</ref>]]
During his early period, Bohm made a number of significant contributions to physics, particularly [[quantum mechanics]] and [[relativity theory]]. As a postgraduate at Berkeley, he developed a theory of [[plasma (physics)|plasmas]], discovering the [[electron]] phenomenon known as [[Bohm diffusion]].<ref>D. Bohm: ''The characteristics of electrical discharges in magnetic fields'', in: A.&nbsp;Guthrie, R.&nbsp;K. Wakerling (eds.), McGraw–Hill, 1949.</ref> His first book, ''Quantum Theory'', published in 1951, was well received by Einstein, among others. But Bohm became dissatisfied with the orthodox interpretation of quantum theory he wrote about in that book. Starting from the realization that the [[WKB approximation]] of quantum mechanics leads to deterministic equations and convinced that a mere approximation could not turn a probabilistic theory into a deterministic theory, he doubted the inevitability of the conventional approach to quantum mechanics.<ref>[[Maurice A. de Gosson]], Basil J. Hiley: ''Zeno paradox for Bohmian trajectories: the unfolding of the metatron'', 3 January 2011 ([http://www.freewebs.com/cvdegosson/ZenoPaper.pdf PDF]&nbsp;– retrieved 16 February 2012).</ref>

Bohm's aim was not to set out a deterministic, mechanical viewpoint but to show that it was possible to attribute properties to an underlying reality, in contrast to the conventional approach.<ref>B. J. Hiley: [http://www.bbk.ac.uk/tpru/BasilHiley/History_of_Bohm_s_QT.pdf ''Some remarks on the evolution of Bohm's proposals for an alternative to quantum mechanics''], 30 January 2010.</ref> He began to develop his own interpretation (the [[De Broglie–Bohm theory]], also called the [[pilot wave]] theory), the predictions of which agreed perfectly with the non-deterministic quantum theory. He initially called his approach a [[hidden variable theories|hidden variable]] theory, but he later called it ''ontological theory'', reflecting his view that a [[stochastic process]] underlying the phenomena described by his theory might one day be found. Bohm and his colleague [[Basil Hiley]] later stated that they had found their own choice of terms of an "interpretation in terms of hidden variables" to be too restrictive, especially since their variables, position and momentum, "are not actually hidden".<ref>David Bohm, Basil Hiley: ''The Undivided Universe: An Ontological Interpretation of Quantum Theory'', edition published in the Taylor & Francis e-library 2009 (first edition Routledge, 1993), {{ISBN|0-203-98038-7}}, [https://books.google.com/books?id=vt9XKjc4WAQC&pg=PA2 p. 2].</ref>

Bohm's work and the [[EPR paradox|EPR argument]] became the major factor motivating [[John Stewart Bell]]'s [[Bell's inequality|inequality]], which rules out [[locality principle|local]] hidden variable theories; the full consequences of Bell's work are still being investigated.

=== Brazil ===
After Bohm's arrival in Brazil on 10 October 1951, the US Consul in [[São Paulo]] confiscated his passport, informing him he could retrieve it only to return to his country, which reportedly frightened Bohm<ref>Russell Olwell: ''[http://web.mit.edu/sts/pubs/pdfs/MIT_STS_WorkingPaper_20_Olwell.pdf Physics and politics in cold war America: the two exiles of David Bohm]'', Working Paper Number&nbsp;2, Working Program in Science, Technology, and Society; [[Massachusetts Institute of Technology]]</ref> and significantly lowered his spirits, as he had hoped to travel to Europe. He applied for and received [[Brazilian nationality law|Brazilian citizenship]], but by law, had to give up his [[US citizenship]]; he was able to reclaim it only decades later, in 1986, after pursuing a lawsuit.<ref name="freire">[[Olival Freire, Jr.]]: ''[http://www.controversia.fis.ufba.br/index_arquivos/Freire-Bohm-HSPS.pdf Science and Exile: David Bohm, the cold war, and a new interpretation of quantum mechanics] {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120326192406/http://www.controversia.fis.ufba.br/index_arquivos/Freire-Bohm-HSPS.pdf |date=26 March 2012 }}'', HSPS, vol. 36, part 1, pp. 1–34, ISSN 0890-9997, 2005</ref>

At the [[University of São Paulo]], Bohm worked on the causal theory that became the subject of his publications in 1952. [[Jean-Pierre Vigier]] traveled to [[São Paulo]], where he worked with Bohm for three months; Ralph Schiller, student of cosmologist [[Peter Bergmann]], was his assistant for two years; he worked with Tiomno and Walther Schützer; and [[Mario Bunge]] stayed to work with him for one year. He was in contact with Brazilian physicists [[Mário Schenberg]], [[Jean Meyer (physicist)|Jean Meyer]], [[José Leite Lopes|Leite Lopes]], and had discussions on occasion with visitors to Brazil, including [[Richard Feynman]], [[Isidor Rabi]], [[Léon Rosenfeld]], [[Carl Friedrich von Weizsäcker]], [[Herbert L. Anderson]], [[Donald Kerst]], [[Marcos Moshinsky]], Alejandro Medina, and the former assistant to [[Werner Heisenberg|Heisenberg]], [[Guido Beck]], who encouraged him in his work and helped him to obtain funding. The Brazilian [[CNPq]] explicitly supported his work on the causal theory and funded several researchers around Bohm. His work with Vigier was the beginning of a long-standing cooperation between the two and [[Louis De Broglie]], in particular, on connections to the hydrodynamics model proposed by [[Erwin Madelung|Madelung]].<ref>{{cite web | url=http://www.uni-frankfurt.de/fb/fb13/Dateien/paf/paf73.html | title=Erwin Madelung 1881–1972 | publisher=[[Goethe University Frankfurt|Goethe-Universität Frankfurt am Main]] | date=12 December 2008 | access-date=8 May 2012 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120212130742/http://www.uni-frankfurt.de/fb/fb13/Dateien/paf/paf73.html | archive-date=12 February 2012 }}</ref> 

Yet the causal theory met much resistance and skepticism, with many physicists holding the [[Copenhagen interpretation]] to be the only viable approach to quantum mechanics.<ref name="freire"/> Bohm and Vigier both emphasized causality, not determinism.<ref>{{cite journal | last1= Drezet | first1=Aurélien | title= Forewords for the Special Issue 'Pilot-wave and Beyond: Louis de Broglie and David Bohm's Quest for a Quantum Ontology' | journal=Foundations of Physics | volume=53 | issue=62 | year=2023 | doi=10.1007/s10701-023-00685-y | bibcode = 2023FoPh...53...62D| doi-access=free | arxiv=2212.13186 }}</ref> In this context, Bohm proposed a causal approach in which the material world could be represented at an infinite number of levels, with stochastic dynamics at every level.<ref>{{cite arXiv | eprint=2307.05611v1 | author1=Flavio Del Santo | author2=Gerd Christian Krizek | title=Against the "nightmare of a mechanically determined universe": Why Bohm was never a Bohmian | date=2023 | class=physics.hist-ph }}</ref>

From 1951 to 1953, Bohm and [[David Pines]] published the articles in which they introduced the [[random phase approximation]] and proposed the [[plasmon]].<ref>{{cite journal|author1=Pines, D  |author2=Bohm, D. A|title=Collective Description of Electron Interactions. I. Magnetic Interactions|journal=Physical Review|volume=82|issue=5|pages=625–634|year=1951|doi=10.1103/physrev.82.625|bibcode = 1951PhRv...82..625B }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|author1=Pines, D  |author2=Bohm, D. A|title=Collective Description of Electron Interactions: II. Collective vs Individual Particle Aspects of the Interactions|journal=Physical Review|volume=85|issue=2|pages=338–353|year=1952|doi=10.1103/physrev.85.338|bibcode = 1952PhRv...85..338P }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|author1=Pines, D  |author2=Bohm, D.|title=A Collective Description of Electron Interactions: III. Coulomb Interactions in a Degenerate Electron Gas|journal=Physical Review|volume=92|issue=3|pages=609–626|year=1953|doi=10.1103/physrev.92.609|bibcode = 1953PhRv...92..609B }}</ref>

=== Bohm and Aharonov form of the EPR paradox ===
In 1955, Bohm relocated to Israel, where he spent two years working at the [[Technion]], at [[Haifa]]. There, he met Sarah Woolfson, whom he married in 1956. In 1957, Bohm and his student [[Yakir Aharonov]] published a new version of the [[EPR paradox|Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen (EPR) paradox]], reformulating the original argument in terms of spin.<ref>{{cite journal | last1=Bohm | first1=D. | last2=Aharonov | first2=Y. | title=Discussion of Experimental Proof for the Paradox of Einstein, Rosen, and Podolsky | journal=Physical Review | publisher=American Physical Society (APS) | volume=108 | issue=4 | date=1957-11-15 | issn=0031-899X | doi=10.1103/physrev.108.1070 | pages=1070–1076| bibcode=1957PhRv..108.1070B }}</ref> It was that form of the EPR paradox that was discussed by [[John Stewart Bell]] in his famous paper of 1964.<ref>{{cite journal |first=J.S. |last=Bell |title=On the Einstein Podolsky Rosen paradox |journal=Physics Physique Fizika |volume=1 |issue=3 |pages=195–200 |url=https://cds.cern.ch/record/111654/files/vol1p195-200_001.pdf |doi=10.1103/PhysicsPhysiqueFizika.1.195 |year=1964 |doi-access=free }}</ref>

=== Aharonov–Bohm effect ===
{{main|Aharonov–Bohm effect}}
[[File:Aharonov-Bohm effect.svg|thumbnail|right|210px|Schematic of double-slit experiment in which Aharonov–Bohm effect can be observed: electrons pass through two slits, interfering at an observation screen, with the interference pattern shifted when a magnetic field '''B''' is turned on in the cylindrical solenoid.]]
In 1957, Bohm relocated to the United Kingdom as a research fellow at the [[University of Bristol]]. In 1959, Bohm and Aharonov discovered the [[Aharonov–Bohm effect]], showing how a magnetic field could affect a region of space in which the field had been shielded, but its vector potential did not vanish there. That showed for the first time that the [[magnetic vector potential]], hitherto a mathematical convenience, could have real physical (quantum) effects.

In 1961, Bohm was made professor of theoretical physics at the [[University of London]]'s [[Birkbeck, University of London|Birkbeck College]], becoming emeritus in 1987. His collected papers are stored there.<ref>{{Cite web |url=http://www.aim25.ac.uk/cgi-bin/search2?coll_id=3070&inst_id=33 |title=collected papers |access-date=26 November 2005 |archive-date=11 February 2006 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060211083535/http://www.aim25.ac.uk/cgi-bin/search2?coll_id=3070&inst_id=33 }}</ref>

=== Implicate and explicate order ===
{{main|Implicate and explicate order}}
At Birkbeck College, much of the work of Bohm and [[Basil Hiley]] expanded on the notion of implicate, explicate, and generative orders proposed by Bohm.<ref name="wholeness"/><ref>{{cite journal | last1=Bohm | first1=David | last2=Hiley | first2=Basil J. | last3=Stuart | first3=Allan E. G. | title=On a new mode of description in physics | journal=International Journal of Theoretical Physics | publisher=Springer Science and Business Media LLC | volume=3 | issue=3 | year=1970 | issn=0020-7748 | doi=10.1007/bf00671000 | pages=171–183| bibcode=1970IJTP....3..171B | s2cid=121080682 }}</ref><ref>David Bohm, F. David Peat: ''[[Science, Order, and Creativity]]'', 1987</ref> In the view of Bohm and Hiley, "things, such as particles, objects, and indeed subjects" exist as "semi-autonomous quasi-local features" of an underlying activity. Such features can be considered to be independent only up to a certain level of approximation in which certain criteria are fulfilled. In that picture, the [[classical limit]] for quantum phenomena, in terms of a condition that the [[action (physics)|action function]] is not much greater than the [[Planck constant]], indicates one such criterion. They used the word "[[holomovement]]" for the activity in such orders.<ref>Basil J. Hiley: ''Process and the Implicate Order: their relevance to Quantum Theory and Mind.'' ([http://www.ctr4process.org/publications/Articles/LSI05/Hiley%20paper.pdf PDF] {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110926212330/http://www.ctr4process.org/publications/Articles/LSI05/Hiley%20paper.pdf |date=26 September 2011 }})</ref>

=== Holonomic model of the brain ===
{{main|Holonomic brain theory}}
[[File:Holography-reconstruct.png|thumb|200px|right|In a holographic reconstruction, each region of a photographic plate contains the whole image.]]
In collaboration with [[Stanford University]] neuroscientist [[Karl H. Pribram]], Bohm was involved in the early development of the [[holonomic model]] of the functioning of the brain, a model for human cognition that is drastically different from conventionally-accepted ideas.<ref name = "holo"/> Bohm worked with Pribram on the theory that the brain operates in a manner that is similar to a [[hologram]], in accordance with quantum mathematical principles and the characteristics of wave patterns.<ref>[http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~sai/pribram.htm The holographic brain] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060518075852/http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~sai/pribram.htm |date=18 May 2006 }}, with Karl Pribram</ref>

=== Consciousness and thought ===
In addition to his scientific work, Bohm was deeply interested in exploring the nature of consciousness, with particular attention to the role of thought as it relates to attention, motivation, and conflict in the individual and in society. Those concerns were a natural extension of his earlier interest in [[Marxist ideology]] and [[Hegelian philosophy]]. His views were brought into sharper focus through extensive interactions with the philosopher, speaker, and writer [[Jiddu Krishnamurti]], beginning in 1961.<ref name="Years">{{cite book|author=Mary Lutyens|title=Krishnamurti: The Years of Fulfillment|chapter=Freedom is Not Choice|chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=WKmJndX5B8wC&q=208|year=1983|publisher=Krishnamurti Foundation Trust Ltd.|isbn=978-0-900506-20-8|page=208|title-link=Krishnamurti: The Years of Fulfillment|author-link=Mary Lutyens}}</ref><ref name="Uncommon">{{cite book|author=David Edmund Moody|title=An Uncommon Collaboration: David Bohm and J. Krishnamurti|year=2017|publisher=Alpha Centauri Press|isbn=978-0-692-85427-3}}</ref> Their collaboration lasted a quarter of a century, and their recorded dialogues were published in several volumes.<ref name="T&A">{{cite book|author= J. Krishnamurti|title=Truth and Actuality|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=zYIF1nO4cdkC|year=2000|publisher=Krishnamurti Foundation Trust Ltd.|isbn=978-81-87326-18-2}}</ref><ref name="Ending">{{cite book|author= J. Krishnamurti and D. Bohm|title=The Ending of Time|url=https://archive.org/details/endingoftime00kris|url-access= registration|year=1985|publisher=HarperCollins|isbn=978-0-06-064796-4}}</ref><ref name="Limits">{{cite book|author= J. Krishnamurti and D. Bohm|title=The Limits of Thought: Discussions between J. Krishnamurti and David Bohm |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=At2FAgAAQBAJ|year=1999|publisher=Routledge|isbn=978-0-415-19398-6}}</ref>

Bohm's prolonged involvement with the philosophy of Krishnamurti was regarded somewhat skeptically by some of his scientific peers.<ref name="Infinite">Peat 1997</ref><ref name="SI"/> An examination in 2017 of the relationship between the two men presents it in a more positive light and shows that Bohm's work in the psychological field was complementary to and compatible with his contributions to theoretical physics.<ref name="Uncommon"/>

The mature expression of Bohm's views in the psychological field was presented in a seminar conducted in 1990 at the [[Oak Grove School (Ojai, California)|Oak Grove School]], founded by Krishnamurti in [[Ojai, California]]. It was one of a series of seminars held by Bohm at Oak Grove School, and it was published as ''Thought as a System''.<ref name="Thought">{{cite book|author= David Bohm|title=Thought as a System|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=9Q-3WN0LajsC|year=1994|publisher=Psychology Press|isbn=978-0-415-11030-3}}</ref> In the seminar, Bohm described the pervasive influence of thought throughout society, including the many erroneous assumptions about the nature of thought and its effects in daily life.

In the seminar, Bohm develops several interrelated themes. He points out that thought is the ubiquitous tool that is used to solve every kind of problem: personal, social, scientific, and so on. Yet thought, he maintains, is also inadvertently the source of many of those problems. He recognizes and acknowledges the irony of the situation: it is as if one gets sick by going to the doctor.<ref name="Uncommon"/><ref name="Thought"/>

Bohm maintains that thought is a system, in the sense that it is an interconnected network of concepts, ideas and assumptions that pass seamlessly between individuals and throughout society. If there is a fault in the functioning of thought, therefore, it must be a systemic fault, which infects the entire network. The thought that is brought to bear to resolve any given problem, therefore, is susceptible to the same flaw that created the problem it is trying to solve.<ref name="Uncommon"/><ref name="Thought"/>

Thought proceeds as if it is merely reporting objectively, but in fact, it is often coloring and distorting perception in unexpected ways. What is required in order to correct the distortions introduced by thought, according to Bohm, is a form of [[proprioception]], or self-awareness. Neural receptors throughout the body inform us directly of our physical position and movement, but there is no corresponding awareness of the activity of thought. Such an awareness would represent psychological proprioception and would enable the possibility of perceiving and correcting the unintended consequences of the thinking process.<ref name="Uncommon"/><ref name="Thought"/>

=== Further interests ===
In his book ''On Creativity'', quoting [[Alfred Korzybski]], the Polish-American who developed the field of [[General Semantics]], Bohm expressed the view that "metaphysics is an expression of a world view" and is "thus to be regarded as an art form, resembling poetry in some ways and mathematics in others, rather than as an attempt to say something true about reality as a whole".<ref>{{cite book |author=David Bohm |title=On Creativity |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=Mcd4SsIjVKUC&pg=PA118 |date=12 October 2012 |publisher=Routledge |isbn=978-1-136-76818-7 |page=118}}</ref>

Bohm was keenly aware of various ideas outside the scientific mainstream. In his book ''Science, Order and Creativity'', Bohm referred to the views of various biologists on the evolution of the species, including [[Rupert Sheldrake]].<ref name="BohmPeat2014">{{cite book |author1=David Bohm |author2=F. David Peat |title=Science, Order and Creativity Second Edition |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=4ZTsAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA204 |date=25 February 2014 |publisher=Routledge |isbn=978-1-317-83546-2 |pages=204–}}</ref> He also knew the ideas of [[Wilhelm Reich]].<ref name="Peat1997">Peat 1997, p. 80</ref>

Contrary to many other scientists, Bohm did not exclude the [[paranormal]] out of hand. Bohm temporarily even held [[Uri Geller]]'s bending of keys and spoons to be possible, prompting warning remarks by his colleague [[Basil Hiley]] that it might undermine the scientific credibility of their work in physics. [[Martin Gardner]] reported this in a ''[[Skeptical Inquirer]]'' article and also critiqued the views of [[Jiddu Krishnamurti]], with whom Bohm had met in 1959 and had had many subsequent exchanges. Gardner said that Bohm's view of the interconnectedness of mind and matter "flirted with [[panpsychism]]"<ref name="SI">{{cite web |url=http://thinkg.net/david_bohm/martin_gardner_on_david_bohm_and_krishnamurti.html |title=David Bohm and Jiddo Krishnamurti |last=Gardner |first=Martin |date=July 2000 |work=Skeptical Inquirer |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150309114214/http://thinkg.net/david_bohm/martin_gardner_on_david_bohm_and_krishnamurti.html |archive-date=9 March 2015 |df=dmy-all}}</ref> (on one occasion, Bohm summarized: "Even the electron is informed with a certain level of mind."<ref>{{cite book |title=Quantum Implications: Essays in Honour of David Bohm |publisher=Routledge |year=2012 |isbn=978-1-134-91417-3 |page=443 |editor1=Hiley, Basil |editor2=Peat, F. David}}</ref>).

=== Bohm dialogue ===
<!-- This section is linked from [[Change management]]. -->
{{main|Bohm Dialogue}}
To address societal problems during his later years, Bohm wrote a proposal for a solution that has become known as "[[Bohm Dialogue]]", in which equal status and "free space" form the most important prerequisites of communication and the appreciation of differing personal beliefs. An essential ingredient in this form of dialogue is that participants "suspend" immediate action or judgment and give themselves and each other the opportunity to become aware of the thought process itself. Bohm suggested that if the "dialogue groups" were experienced on a sufficiently-wide scale, they could help overcome the isolation and fragmentation that Bohm observed in society.