Schrödinger's Cat

[Qfwfq]

Many times the implications of quantum mechanics creep into discussions here in Hypography. Quite often there is disagreement about certain implications, or some posters are less informed on the topic and want explantions.

These are often discussed on the spot but it might be a good idea to have a chat here. A good thing to start the snowball rolling might be the famous Gedankenexperiment:

A box contains a sample of a radioisotope and a suitable detector, possibly such that external radioctivity is negligible and things can be adjusted to have an average of a couple of counts an hour from the detector, which can also be turned on and off from outside the box. The detector is rigged to trigger a device that will release cyanide into the air inside the box, enough to kill a cat that is placed inside the closed box. If the detector is then left switched on for an hour and then switched off, the chance of the cat being killed is about 50-50.

After the detector has been switched off, and before the box is opened to see if the cat has been killed, how does the cat feel?

[Anomalistic Thought]

The cat is both dead and alive, it shows the quantum property of superposition. This being true, I guess the cat would either feel both dead and alive. Though do cats understand the concept of death? Of course if they did, then they would be aware of their state, and cause fluctuations in the experiment, similar to how temputure and heat affect actual particals in superposition. The property I much prefer is quantum tunneling. I beleive this is when a partical passes through a barier that normaly would stop it.

[lindagarrette]

Couldn't we talk about something besides that poor tortured cat? I wish Schrodinger had used a different example because I get sad whenever the poor little helpless thing is mentioned. Maybe that's why I don't agree with the observer influence concept.

[Qfwfq]

Neither do I agree with the conscious observer influence concept, but I'd be of the same opinion if it were a cockroach in the box!!!

P. S. I believe it wasn't Schrödinger that chose the cat.

[Rincewind]

From a list of famous (?!) quotes:

"What have you done to the cat? It looks half dead!"
---Schrödinger's wife.

[paultrr]

Originally Posted by Qfwfq

Many times the implications of quantum mechanics creep into discussions here in Hypography.

It tends to creep in because its the background of the macroworld, which seems so ordered as a whole, and yet, down at that scale everything seems unordered.

I'd suggest the cat feels exactly alive if it is alive and feels nothing if it is dead, at least from a scientific point of view since by being dead all capacity to feel would be gone.

[paultrr]

Originally Posted by Anomalistic Thought

The cat is both dead and alive, it shows the quantum property of superposition. This being true, I guess the cat would either feel both dead and alive. Though do cats understand the concept of death? Of course if they did, then they would be aware of their state, and cause fluctuations in the experiment, similar to how temputure and heat affect actual particals in superposition. The property I much prefer is quantum tunneling. I beleive this is when a partical passes through a barier that normaly would stop it.

Who's to say a cat would not perform the same position of an observe and have influence via fluctuations in the experiment. I've often thought that old cat in the box overlooked that one a bit.

[Qfwfq]

Originally Posted by paultrr

I've often thought that old cat in the box overlooked that one a bit.

It wasn't overlooked for long, that's where Wigner's friend came in!

[Eduffy80911]

I'm no expert, so please correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the implication in the cat experiment is that probability = reality. It's like saying that if you flip a coin and it falls where nobody can see it, it is both heads and tails until someone actually observes it. I believe truth and reality are objective and don't need human confirmation to exist, therefore the cat is either dead or alive, but not both, and whether anyone ever checks on the cat's health or not will not affect which it is.

[Buffy]

Originally Posted by Eduffy80911

I'm no expert, so please correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the implication in the cat experiment is that probability = reality. It's like saying that if you flip a coin and it falls where nobody can see it, it is both heads and tails until someone actually observes it. I believe truth and reality are objective and don't need human confirmation to exist, therefore the cat is either dead or alive, but not both, and whether anyone ever checks on the cat's health or not will not affect which it is.

Most people misunderstand what point Erwin Schrodinger was actually trying to make. His point was that the indeterminancy which is dominant at the quantum level (e.g. Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle) does *not* translate well into the macroscopic world. That's not to say that quantum uncertainty does not have macroscopic effects, but that the observational issues really don't apply directly.

Cheers,
Buffy