Schrödinger's cat question

  • Context: High School 
  • Thread starter Thread starter leonid.ge
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on Schrödinger's cat thought experiment and its implications for quantum mechanics (QM). Participants argue that the original intent of Schrödinger's thought experiment was to highlight the absurdities of QM, particularly regarding superposition and entanglement. They emphasize that while entangled particles, such as electrons with opposite spins, maintain their correlation over distances, the cat and the atom are not truly entangled in the same sense. The conversation also critiques popular interpretations of the thought experiment, asserting that it oversimplifies complex quantum phenomena.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of quantum mechanics principles, particularly superposition and entanglement.
  • Familiarity with the concept of decoherence in quantum systems.
  • Basic knowledge of classical physics and its relationship to quantum phenomena.
  • Awareness of the historical context of quantum mechanics developments in the 1920s.
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the concept of quantum decoherence and its implications for classical reality.
  • Study the differences between Schrödinger's original intent and popular interpretations of the cat thought experiment.
  • Explore the mathematical foundations of quantum mechanics to understand superposition and entanglement.
  • Examine the historical evolution of quantum mechanics from the 1920s to present-day interpretations.
USEFUL FOR

Students and enthusiasts of quantum mechanics, physicists exploring the foundations of quantum theory, and educators seeking to clarify misconceptions about Schrödinger's cat and its relevance to modern physics.

leonid.ge
Messages
17
Reaction score
4
TL;DR
In Schrödinger's cat thought experiment, am I right to say that the cat and the the atom are not truly entangled at the start?
So if the the room is large and the cat starts walking away from the atom, the probability of the decayed atom influencing the cat decreases...

When entangled particles are created, say a pair of electrons with opposite spins, they are truly entangled even when taken far apart.
So would it not be better for this thought experiment to use two cats which hug each other in outer space. At some stage the cats get angry and push each other apart and fly away from each other. So if we let them fly for a long time and suppose the vacuum is perfect and they don't emit or receive any radiation, both cats are still entangled, and measuring their spins when they are 10 light years away will produce correlating results.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
leonid.ge said:
TL;DR Summary: In Schrödinger's cat thought experiment, am I right to say that the cat and the the atom are not truly entangled at the start?

So if the the room is large and the cat starts walking away from the atom, the probability of the decayed atom influencing the cat decreases...

When entangled particles are created, say a pair of electrons with opposite spins, they are truly entangled even when taken far apart.
So would it not be better for this thought experiment to use two cats which hug each other in outer space. At some stage the cats get angry and push each other apart and fly away from each other. So if we let them fly for a long time and suppose the vacuum is perfect and they don't emit or receive any radiation, both cats are still entangled, and measuring their spins when they are 10 light years away will produce correlating results.
I think you've missed the point of the thought experiment.
 
  • Like
  • Agree
Likes   Reactions: Delta Prime, phinds and bhobba
Thanks!
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: PeroK
leonid.ge said:
So would it not be better for this thought experiment to use two cats….
The point of the thought experiment was to show that something was wrong with the then current (mid 1920s) understanding of QM - the math seemed to lead to the clearly incorrect result that we would end up with a cat that was neither dead nor alive.

You may be confusing this issue with the altogether-unrelated question of spin-entangled particles.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: bhobba and PeterDonis
Nugatory said:
The point of the thought experiment

Which is also missed by most of popularisations, and unfortunately a lot of physicists.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: ojitojuntos, mattt, bhobba and 1 other person
weirdoguy said:
Which is also missed by most of popularisations, and unfortunately a lot of physicists.
Indeed.

We now know the real issue is how the classical world of everyday experience emerges. Once the chain in the thought experiment is commonsense classical, there is no issue, and that occurs prior to the detector. After that, there is no mystery.

To be fair, it is a good thought experiment introducing entanglement for those learning QM.

The modern understanding of how the ordinary world emerges has advanced a lot since the 1920s:
https://www.sciencenews.org/blog/context/gell-mann-hartle-spin-quantum-narrative-about-reality

Thanks
Bill
 
There is a big gap on why the Schrödinger cat is interesting vs what is intended by popular physics.

How each community uses the Schrödinger cat:
  • Schrödinger (original): to show that quantum mechanics is absurd
  • Popular physics: to introduce superposition (this is possibly one of the worse thought experiments for that)
  • Actual physicists: to discuss decoherence (this requires understanding at least undergrad physics).
The popular physics route is very bad because Schrödinger's cat taken in its most simplified form is not different than a coin flip in terms of outcomes. With this experiment alone, you cannot use it to explain why it is different than uncertainty of a coin flip because the only basis in which you can measure is the live/dead basis.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 143 ·
5
Replies
143
Views
11K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 47 ·
2
Replies
47
Views
5K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 38 ·
2
Replies
38
Views
5K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K