Why the inside of a box is coherent

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Binax011
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Box Coherent
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of coherence in quantum systems, particularly in the context of Schrödinger's thought experiment involving a cat inside a box. Participants explore why coherence appears to be maintained inside the box while the outside environment does not exhibit the same properties. The scope includes theoretical interpretations of quantum mechanics and the implications of measurement and isolation in quantum systems.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that the difference in coherence between the inside and outside of the box may be due to non-symmetric properties or limitations on coherence based on the density or volume of decoherent particles.
  • Others argue that the distinction between a "gedanken cat" and a "real cat" highlights the difference between theoretical models and physical reality, suggesting that the molecular system of a real cat interacts with its environment, affecting coherence.
  • A participant suggests that measurement is a physical process influenced by a Hamiltonian, and that the box creates conditions (like an infinite potential well) that prevent measurement from occurring.
  • Another participant questions the premise of the original inquiry, stating that the thought experiment illustrates a misunderstanding of quantum mechanics, where the cat's state is not genuinely in superposition but rather reflects our ignorance until measurement occurs.
  • Clarifications are sought regarding the nature of coherence and the factors that allow it to persist inside the box while failing outside.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the nature of coherence and measurement in quantum systems, indicating that multiple competing interpretations and models exist without a clear consensus.

Contextual Notes

The discussion touches on complex interpretations of quantum mechanics, measurement theory, and the implications of isolation on coherence, but does not resolve the underlying assumptions or definitions that may influence these interpretations.

Binax011
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
So in isolating a system so that it is in superposition in a volume of space, why is it the inside of the box gains coherence and the outside doesn't?

It seems to me either the inside and outside have non-symmetric properties, coherence is limited to a maxium volume or density of decoherent particles. The cat inside the box (for instance) does not hypothesize that the outside observers are in superposition, why not? What is different inside and outside the box? Does coherence begin but run into too great of density/volume of stuff and coherence simply can't take hold and fade away outside the box?

Clarifications?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
To me, the actual difference is between Gedanken Cat and Real Cat. Considering a thought ("gedanken") experiment, physicists place into the box a "gedanken cat" which is merely a molecular system. No wonder, it can be in a superposition or in a mixed state. But, considering a real cat, the molecular system is no more than the cat's "physical interface", to interact physically with other things.
 
Last edited:
If I'm understanding correctly, you're asking why the cat inside the box isn't measured while a cat outside of the box is? you might want to wait for other users as I'm not an expert (understatement of the year...) but the Idea is that measurement is a physical process ,i.e. it's driven by a certain Hamiltonian (complex exponent of the conjugate of the given measurable multiplied by the measurable itself), and it's assume that the box forces a Hamiltonian of an infinite potential well, and as such measurement cannot occur.
 
The original question is not completely clear, but if (as the replies above are assuming) the question is about how the cat can be in a coherent superposition inside the box while we all agree that the world outside the box cannot be, then the question is based on a mistaken premise. The point of Schrödinger's thought experiment was to point out a problem with then-current (1930ish) interpretation of the mathematical formulation of quantum mechanics: it seemed to predict that the cat would be in such a superposition even though we all know perfectly well that what we really have is a box containing either a dead cat or an alive cat, and there's nothing surprising about not knowing which iuntil we look. It took the best part of the next half-century to understand what the math was really saying; David Lindley's book "Where does the weirdness go?" is a good layman-friendly popularization.

For the more general question in the original post: The key to maintaining a system in a coherent superposition is adequately isolating it from the environment around it. Measurement and observation only come into the picture because measuring devices are part of the environment, so when we're allowing the quantum system to interact with a measuring device to make an observation we've lost the isolation from the environment.
 
Binax011 said:
So in isolating a system so that it is in superposition in a volume of space, why is it the inside of the box gains coherence and the outside doesn't?

It seems to me either the inside and outside have non-symmetric properties, coherence is limited to a maxium volume or density of decoherent particles. The cat inside the box (for instance) does not hypothesize that the outside observers are in superposition, why not? What is different inside and outside the box? Does coherence begin but run into too great of density/volume of stuff and coherence simply can't take hold and fade away outside the box?

Clarifications?
http://lanl.arxiv.org/abs/1406.3221
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 143 ·
5
Replies
143
Views
12K
  • · Replies 44 ·
2
Replies
44
Views
12K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
4K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
6K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
4K
  • · Replies 59 ·
2
Replies
59
Views
13K