Another explanation of that poor, poor cat

  • Thread starter petmar
  • Start date

Better than the original explanation?

  • YES! I love it!

    Votes: 1 25.0%
  • NO WAY!

    Votes: 3 75.0%

  • Total voters
    4

jcsd

Science Advisor
Gold Member
2,085
11
Raynart, what you posted sounds simlair to the 'Wigner's friend' version of Schoredinger's cat, in which a human is place in the box to observe whether the cat dies or not. However you should be very careful aout jumping to conclusions as what you have also posted sounds alot like 'psycho-parallelism' which is almost universally rejected as explanation of the paradox.

Basically the idea that the cat is in a suppositon of states is rejected as it does not conform to our everyday experince of cats.
 

selfAdjoint

Staff Emeritus
Gold Member
Dearly Missed
6,764
5
Well, our everyday experience of cats that we can't see is that they might be anywhere and in any state. So on the interpretation of the wave function that it expresses our state of knowledge about something (I admit this interpretation has technical problems), the everyday cat is then in a superposition of states, which is collapsed to an eigenstate when we see the cat.
 

jcsd

Science Advisor
Gold Member
2,085
11
Yes, but do we ever see an evidence that implies that cats are non-localized? (I asked my cat if she is ever in an uncollapsed state but she just miaowed).
 
369
0
Originally posted by jcsd
Yes, but do we ever see an evidence that implies that cats are non-localized? (I asked my cat if she is ever in an uncollapsed state but she just miaowed).
Yes..but wait a mo!..I remember seeing an article in Nature that shows that Cats and Mice have a correlation within their brains?

I will dig the article out, I remember the Cat somehow influences the mouse using, well as I recall ESP?..or an equivilent phenonema, but I know it related to Quantum Entanglement States between the Cat and Mouse.

But for now, I will refrain from posting this until further orders!:smile:
 

jammieg

Quantum entaglement is a good example of today's cat, just another experiment that came up with odd results and as a result all kinds of way out there conclusions were drawn from it and of them the most profitable turned out to be a theory of parrelel universes, why?
Becuase it's the one that captures the imagination and emotions the most not reason, it's the one that would make the most sales in Hollywood. Same with the cat I think, it's just harder to go back into the history of it and see it's origins, but the key is if someone in your physics class where to suggest the cat thing today and not back then and nobody had ever heard of it before and he said that it was impossible to know from the observer's point of view so the cat is both alive and dead, we would probably immediately see it as lacking in explanation and want to know what they meant, and so they would go on to explain that instruments don't exist to see the quantum world directly just as we can't see the cat directly and so we have to use mathematical probabilities and formulas to really work with these things and it gets real complicated with probabilities but even more so with lack of detailed explanations and people trying to capitalize on real science to extend to media and make money off of hype.
 

jcsd

Science Advisor
Gold Member
2,085
11
Jammieg, the Schroedinger's cat experiment has never been perfomed as due to decoherence, you could not expect to get anything other than a classical result. It is a thought experiment and is one orginally cretaed to attamept to show the absurdity of the Copenhagen interpretation.

Qantum Entanglemnt was predicted before it was tested and infact Schroedinger's cat would represent a many particle entangled system, which is why it decoheres.

For the third time, the idea that the cat is in a suppostion of states in genereally rejected, which poses the question: why don't macroscopic objects exhibit quantum behaviour? with probaly the best answer being: decoherence.
 
21
0
Of course we can't measure the uncertainty principle the idea is that the different possibilities exist in seperate universes or exsist at the same time the second you open that box the cat becomes either dead or alive. However, there was an experiment done with light put through a small hole and how the shadows and the illuminated parts blended I don't quite remember the particulars. Anyway it shows the effect of the uncertainty principle in real life
 

jcsd

Science Advisor
Gold Member
2,085
11
Originally posted by JKLM
Of course we can't measure the uncertainty principle the idea is that the different possibilities exist in seperate universes or exsist at the same time the second you open that box the cat becomes either dead or alive. However, there was an experiment done with light put through a small hole and how the shadows and the illuminated parts blended I don't quite remember the particulars. Anyway it shows the effect of the uncertainty principle in real life
We can measure the uncertainty principle quite easily as a matter of factas it places a limit on our abilty to predict the outcome of experiments and this limit is easily measured. The idea of mutiple universe is only one intepretation of QM and not the convential one either.

You mean the two-slit diffraction experiment, which in the way you've described it, doesn't indicate uncertainty at all as you've described in a way which can be fully explained by classical theories.
 

Related Threads for: Another explanation of that poor, poor cat

  • Last Post
2
Replies
36
Views
2K
  • Last Post
7
Replies
173
Views
20K
  • Last Post
2
Replies
44
Views
9K
Replies
54
Views
4K
Replies
15
Views
2K
Replies
24
Views
1K
  • Last Post
2
Replies
46
Views
2K

Hot Threads

Top