High School Simple intro about Schrödinger's cat metaphor

Click For Summary
The discussion emphasizes the importance of understanding Schrödinger's cat metaphor without relying on sensationalized pop science interpretations. It highlights the need for beginners to engage with original sources rather than retellings that may misrepresent quantum theory. The conversation acknowledges that while entanglement is an established fact, misconceptions persist due to oversimplified explanations. Participants express a desire to guide newcomers towards a clearer understanding of quantum mechanics and its probabilistic nature. Ultimately, the thread advocates for deeper engagement with the principles of physics rather than repeating outdated interpretational debates.
houlahound
Messages
907
Reaction score
223
Very brief and no math, the author is more about the veracity of checking original sources over retelling pop sci stories.

All has been said here previously but scattered over many threads and easy to miss for newbs.

Might be helpful to beginners who's only exposure is sensational pop sci.

https://betterexplained.com/articles/gotcha-shrodingers-cat/
 
  • Like
Likes Demystifier
Physics news on Phys.org
Well, but this article also gets it wrong. Entanglement is nowadays an established observational fact, and you cannot simply claim as Schrödinger did that it's simply "absurd" and that's why you don't need to care.

For me, the only way out today is to take QT seriously and that the meaning of quantum states is that of probabilities about the outcome of measurements and nothing else. We had tons of useless discussions on these interpretational issues never coming to a conclusion. We don't need to repeat them in yet another thread.
 
  • Like
Likes fresh_42
Don't disagree but please consider that IMO a lot of newbs find there way to this forum precisely because of the pop sci interpretation stuff.

an opportunity to engage them and steer them to thinking clearer and to appreciate what physics really is?
 

Thread 'Two equivalent statements of time reversal symmetric Hamiltonian'

Time reversal invariant Hamiltonians must satisfy ##[H,\Theta]=0## where ##\Theta## is time reversal operator. However, in some texts (for example see Many-body Quantum Theory in Condensed Matter Physics an introduction, HENRIK BRUUS and KARSTEN FLENSBERG, Corrected version: 14 January 2016, section 7.1.4) the time reversal invariant condition is introduced as ##H=H^*##. How these two conditions are identical?
View full post »

Similar threads

Mathematica This Week's Finds in Mathematical Physics (Week 259)
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K