Schrödinger's Cat is a bunch of BS

a reply to: sapien82
Thanks for confirming that you are a comedian.

originally posted by: moebius
Imho people tend to seriously overthink the thought experiment.

When you open the box the subject will be either alive or dead. And if it is dead, an autopsy will be able to say the approximate time of its death.

Going a step further one could also place a camera in the box recording the whole thing, and watch the recording after opening the box to see the exact moment of death.

The important thing to understand imho is that quantum systems will approach classical behavior with increasing amount of interaction with the environment (other quantum systems). There is no need for wave function collapses and special "conscious" observers.

Yes, some people may overthink it.
Other people may underthink it, or not understand Schrödinger's intention (like maybe OP?), as explained here.

www.smbc-comics.com...

originally posted by: rom12345
the cat is an allegory.
You may ask why he chose a cat ?
Was his choice of a cat deterministic, probabilistic, or philosophical ?

Would the Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Animals be any more forgiving if he had suggested using a rat instead of a cat?

(Although it was just a thought experiment, he never actually intended to kill anything).

People get mad about QM because it calls into question our own sentience.

Schrodinger could have used something inanimate, like a pocket watch, or a cup of tea as his potentially "destroyed"/"not destroyed" entity.

But he chose a living being. A cat. Something that has most of the intellectual traits that a human also has.



Ultimately, his criticism was nothing more or less than appeal our collective esoteric belief that human (and animal) consciousness is fundamentally different from other naturally occurring phenomena.

The same faith and/or investment in ego that compels some people to believe in the existence of a god, or the immortality of a soul, will also compel them to reject quantum mechanics, once it starts making predictions that deny sentient beings their unique place in the cosmos.

And it does. Arguing that a photon passing through a double slit, will arrive at a point on the other side that is determined entirely at random, is essentially arguing that photon's make choices on their own. Not intelligent, or well informed choices, mind you. But just as spontaneous as any choice a human makes.

a reply to: CryHavoc

I think Schrödinger just hated Cats

..this is not the point !

the whole Idea of a cat being inside a box was just a joke on the beginning. QM was proposed at that time and Schrödinger was messing around..

... you know, quantum mechanics is just a mathematical interpretation of all we think we can measure and count.
mathematics leads you to some stage things, like negative mass, and negative space... but the most horrible thing is.. creation from nothing !! be careful with it

there is no state of being dead and alive at the same time, cant be, simple as that, you are one or another, can't be both.
...but this is an issue in mathematical equations.. this X.. the unknown, don't let you make the formula right....

...so you have to invent strange things like super position to make the math work again..
and the name is cool, don't you think ? "super" ... sounds great !, a super thing ~!!1

a reply to: Arbitrageur

i think he chose a cat because they have souls !

originally posted by: micpsi

originally posted by: sapien82

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
To be fair, the thought experiment is supposed to be absurd. Schrodinger sided with Einstein in taking a more classic/realist approach to quantum mechanics (God does not play dice.) They believed that the Copenhagen interpretation, developed by Bohr and Heisenberg, was nonsensical.

That's what Schrodinger was trying to get across with his cat in a box.

Looking at it as a whole , reality is nonsensical

No. Our quantum-mechanical depiction of reality is what is nonsensical. That's why many physicists want to overthrow the Copenhagen Interpretation. A cat is not a qunatum object so it is not subject to the Supposition Principle.

How can a cat or any other object not be a quantum object , when they are all within the system that allows for quantum interactions.

Helium nano droplets brought to -297 degrees celcius exhibit the same behaviours in the quantum field as large helium drops in the macro field.

I am a quantum object just as a cat is too
there is no separation between quantum and macro realms as they are all in the same system

I think David Bohm would completely disagree with you

originally posted by: micpsi
So we all have to be comedians, now, do we? Quantum reality is what needs to be taken seriously instead of the flippant way you seem to approve of.

Calling quantum reality absurd or ridiculous is the ignorant person's way of dealing with his inadequate understanding of reality and the paradoxes displayed by it. Reacting to quantum reality by calling it absurd is not "nailing it". The reaction is misconceived and philosophically wrong. But such subtleties no doubt pass over your head, so I won't waste my time defending what I said.

Dog-person, am presuming ?