This article was orginally published under the pen name, .
Preamble about an interpretive predicament. Since the 1959 emergence of Aharonov-Bohm's integral, quantum physics has been in a quandary about its applicability realm. Roughly speaking the AB integral does well in ordered global situations, whereas Schr?dinger's process does well in local quantum situations, which in the Copenhagen spirit are said to be inherently statistical. Since Aharonov and Bohm inferred their integral from global properties of Schr?dinger solutions, one may question such probing for nonstatistical structure hidden in Schr?dinger manifestations. Without deeper insight into the background of a potentially contradictory situation, the apparent magic of that act has led to unresolved conflicts between opposing physics groups of different persuasions. This specifically refers to views held by David Bohm as opposed to orthodox followers of Copenhagen doctrine and Bohm's one-time thesis advisor Oppenheimer.
Preamble about a resolution to the predicament. After the euphoria of Schroedinger's success a one-tier interpretation seemed reasonable, yet in the end it led to a rejection of earlier recipe-like methods as mere approximations. The Schr?dinger-based history of the Aharonov-Bohm process seemingly led to being lumped in as just another Schr?dinger approximation. The success and independent truth reality of the AB integral made that point of view increasingly untenable. Unbeknown to the orthodoxy, an incisive move by Kiehn revealed how a trio of similar quantum integrals permits Schr?dinger-independent derivations using a 1931 existence theorem of de Rham. Since this includes the AB integral, the predicament is now resolved. The end result yields a bonus of a since 1835 (Faraday's electrolytic experiments) existing charge counter plus an integral counting action quanta. Since Copenhagen's one-tier restriction had bereaved us of those insights, a 2-column Display II covers preliminary comparisons how it affects quantum interpretation.
