|
Qwaantum Fizzix iz eezee, | by SouthpawPL | 2006-11-19 12:55:59 |
|
Actually, the thought experiment was meant to | by Esteis | 2005-10-06 14:16:52 |
|
It doesn't get much more absurd than Brewster. | by SouthpawPL | 2005-10-06 14:18:46 |
|
What did Heisenberg do, then? | by Esteis | 2005-10-06 14:22:37 |
|
Yup, the Uncertainty principle. | by merlin | 2005-10-06 14:39:29 |
|
So how does that make quantum theory look absurd? (n/t) | by Esteis | 2005-10-06 14:43:06 |
|
Heisenberg's Uncertainty principle is different | by merlin | 2005-10-06 14:45:32 |
| It's the "indeterminate" part. |
by Astronomer |
2005-10-06 16:46:53 |
And "indeterminate" here doesn't merely mean "unknown." There would be no mystery there. "Indeterminate" as used here actually means that both states (dead or alive) are equally true (under the specified conditions of the experiment, where the probability is 50/50 for either state) until the box is opened. In other words, according to quantum theory, the cat is *both* dead *and* alive, *simultaneously*. Only when it is observed (when the boxed is opened) does one of those probabilities resolve itself into a state of reality.
We see this on the subatomic level all the time. Schrodinger simply devised a (thought) experiment in which a single quantum event with a 50/50 chance of happening would result in the death of a cat, which is definitely NOT a subatomic particle subject to quantum fluctuations. Quantum theory on its face is very counter-intuitive. But it's Schrodinger's "macro-consequence" of a single quantum event that brings its absurdity into focus.
I've always wondered, though: Wouldn't the cat itself be an observer to the goings-on inside the box, thereby forcing the resolution of quantum probabilities into a single state of reality before the box is opened? |
|
[ Reply ] |
|
Thanks for explaining that. | by Esteis | 2005-10-06 16:56:06 |
|
TLP? | by Astronomer | 2005-10-06 21:45:09 |
|
Top Level Post. Only you can make those in your | by Esteis | 2005-10-06 23:41:41 |
|
I suspect something parallel to inertial frames | by tnglives | 2005-10-06 17:24:57 |
|
Self-Interference | by Astronomer | 2005-10-06 23:19:24 |
