I've always been told about how that joke about whether Schrodinger's Cat is alive or dead was merely intended to highlight the fact that "quantum fuzziness" does not scale up to(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); macroscopic objectslike a cat.

But when we do the slit experiment and observe that the photon is detected at both A and B, then aren't we seeing the "fuzziness" extending across amacroscopic distance? (ie. the photon is jumping/spanning across the distance between A and B)

Why is macroscopic object a no-no for showing the fuzziness, but macroscopic distance is fine for showing the fuzziness?

Are we saying that distance doesn't count at all, when it comes to tunnelling?

What is the probability of finding the photon anywhere in the space spanning between A and B?

Can we say that a wave object is an object of infinitely low density, since it is supposed to be spanning across the entire universe?

**Physics Forums | Science Articles, Homework Help, Discussion**

The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

# Slit Experiment vs Schrodinger's Cat

**Physics Forums | Science Articles, Homework Help, Discussion**