Where is the Electron in Schrodinger's Cat Paradox?

[SpaceTiger]

And this is why I "skimmed" over such assertion because I can't believe why such a thing would be "new" and "unknown".

Who said it was? Your habit of putting words in quotes that I never used is really obnoxious.

A superconductor, or a superfluid, is exactly just THAT! It is the clearest manifestation of QM wavefuction at the MACROSCOPIC SCALE, over large distances, and over a very long time[1] and in a 3D box, to boot!

Superconductor behavior is not even close to the same thing as the case we were discussing, so I don't see your point. If you're saying that the existence of superconductors implies that the infinite well solution should collapse to quantum behavior on short timescales, you're just wrong. If you're trying to answer your own question about cases where electrons should be treated quantum mechanically on large scales, then yeah, that's an example of it...

 

[ZapperZ]

Who said it was? Your habit of putting words in quotes that I never used is really obnoxious.

First of all, *I* was the one who ASKED if this is "new" and "unknown". I didn't say that YOU claim these.

Secondly, I asked that because you said "...but I hope you can see the value in analyzing theory beyond the limits of practical experiments..."

The "theory" being the evolution of the electron wavefuction in a 3D potential over LONG period of time till the quantum effects manifest themselves, no? Or am I putting words into your mouth again? If this is correct, then you want to "analyze" this theory?

I then scratch my head and ask if this is new and unknown, afterall, why would you analyze something that is already known? I point to superconductivity as being JUST exactly what you are trying to "analyze". They are made up of "free" carriers (electrons), they can exist forever, and they can be in a 3D potential with the metallic walls as the infinite potential. This is exactly the situation you wanted to analyze, no?

Furthermore, I DID NOT say

"If you're saying that the existence of superconductors implies that the infinite well solution should collapse to quantum behavior on short timescales, you're just wrong."

I have never cared about "time scales" of electrons emitted from their sources. You do. I have ALWAYS maintained from the very beginning that in every practical sense, as soon as this happens, the electron is now a classical particle. Charge particles have typically suffered from decoherence as soon as they are emitted, even in vacuum! The most common means to preseve such coherence is within the quantum "protectorate" mode inside solids such as a superconductor. They can live as long as you want them. And heaven knows, superconductivity (at least the conventional ones) has been analyzed to death.

That is why I brought it up. You are welcome to dismiss this if you want.

Zz.

 

[SpaceTiger]

I then scratch my head and ask if this is new and unknown, afterall, why would you analyze something that is already known?

What do you think this is, a publication? Do you freak at everybody that conducts a thought experiment about phenomena that are already known? Was that not the entire purpose of the original question, to understand standard theory?

Your behavior here has surpassed inappropriate, so I'm done with this "conversation."

 

[thegoodfellow]

i wonder about the energy of the human body or the soul, i wonder if after its body singularity it becomes waves after death. i also wonder about the act of observation and its effects of particle behaviour or its decision to act, do we see this everyday when we know we are being observed and we act in a different way than we would if we were not? after all we are all just matter, if its thoughts of the brain that makes us act different then i would argue that, this thoughts origin was matter itself. anyways its morning i don't know what I am talking about and I am off for a coffee.