the GardenGnome Posted April 7, 2003 Posted April 7, 2003 I don't know why there aren't many people speaking about this subject but any way, does any know anything about the thought experiment of Schrodinger's(how do you pronouce that?)cat.
Raider Posted April 7, 2003 Posted April 7, 2003 The cat is in the bag. You can't see in the bag. You don't know if the cat is dead or alive. The conclusion is that the cat is neither dead nor alive until you open the bag and check. Same with a wave, it is only a probability until observed.
the GardenGnome Posted April 7, 2003 Author Posted April 7, 2003 The cat being in a box with a window of some sort.
blike Posted April 7, 2003 Posted April 7, 2003 Wasn't it a thought experiment to demonstrate the absurdity of qm on a macro scale?
Radical Edward Posted April 8, 2003 Posted April 8, 2003 the proper experiment goes: cat is in a box with a very small radioactive source, detector and bottle of poison. the small source is so small it is of a quantum scale and can exist in a superposition of decayed, and not decayed. should it decay, the detector can tell this, releases the poison and kills the cat. since the source can exist in a superposition, so the experiment goes, so can the cat. As blike says, it is an experiment to demonstrate the absurdity of applying quantum logic to the classical world.
the GardenGnome Posted April 27, 2003 Author Posted April 27, 2003 I wonder if anyone has tried this experiment. It might cause some controversy.
Radical Edward Posted April 28, 2003 Posted April 28, 2003 even if they have, there is no real point, since the result is always a live or dead cat, and you don't learn whether it has been in a superposition for the past few minutes or not.
Sayonara Posted April 28, 2003 Posted April 28, 2003 You could have told me that a week ago. Poor tiddles
Radical Edward Posted April 28, 2003 Posted April 28, 2003 well be happy that in a parallel universe somewhere, tiddles is perfectly fine and wondering what all the fuss is about
the GardenGnome Posted April 28, 2003 Author Posted April 28, 2003 Originally posted by Sayonara³ You could have told me that a week ago. Poor tiddles The pet store is still open.
Sayonara Posted April 29, 2003 Posted April 29, 2003 Originally posted by the GardenGnome The pet store is still open. A good thing too. If it wasn't, I wouldn't know if they had cats in there or not.
mooeypoo Posted December 7, 2003 Posted December 7, 2003 Actually I believe this is a very good point to prove (or, well, show) the "Fourth Dimention is Time" point. (open the box) *NOW* you see a cat. (close the box) *NOW* you don't see a cat. The point is that we don't understand and grasp TIME, we are only affected by it. It's the same argument of "If a tree fell in themiddle of the forest with no one arround did it make a sound?" The answer is uncertain. You can't know. You are *assuming* it did, because every tree before it did noise when it fell, but you can't know for certain. The point of this thing is not to make you go nuts with phylosophical babble (though, hey, I like it! ) - its more to show you that even what we concider PROOFS today, should be taken with a degree of doubt. Doubt everything. Yah. That's my piont. ~mooeypoo
Pinch Paxton Posted December 7, 2003 Posted December 7, 2003 I've only read Scrodinger's Kittens, and the experiment was more to do with light, and an observer in that book. The book suggest that light requires an observer for a photon to exist. So if you close a box with a cat inside, a photon detector, wired to a shotgun. Then put a single photon of light bouncing around inside, and never look inside the box. The light will pass through the detector, but will not be witnessed, so the shotgun should be in a ready to fire state. Does the gun go off, or does it wait for you to open the box? Pincho.
wolfson Posted December 8, 2003 Posted December 8, 2003 http://whatis.techtarget.com/definition/0,,sid9_gci341236,00.html
Deckard Posted January 26, 2004 Posted January 26, 2004 well the tree in the forest is just stupid becuase if that is correct then the universe outside our solar system only came into existence when we started using telescopes to look out and the stars only exist becuase we look at them and when u think about it, the real experiment was about light, without light there is no object to reflect the light therefore the object doesnt exist if u cant see it type stuff, if i am wrong please correct me becuase without light nothing would exist as you cant see it? i say that schrowhoever was just interested in gambling on the results of his tests or he didnt like his cat/cats eitherway its pure stupidity to think this its just like saying "if i close my eyes you dont exist" but if i were to punch you when your eyes are closed and there are no witnesses you dam well feel the punch.
JaKiri Posted January 26, 2004 Posted January 26, 2004 Deckard said in post # :well the tree in the forest is just stupid becuase if that is correct then the universe outside our solar system only came into existence when we started using telescopes to look out and the stars only exist becuase we look at them and when u think about it, the real experiment was about light, without light there is no object to reflect the light therefore the object doesnt exist if u cant see it type stuff, if i am wrong please correct me becuase without light nothing would exist as you cant see it? i say that schrowhoever was just interested in gambling on the results of his tests or he didnt like his cat/cats eitherway its pure stupidity to think this its just like saying "if i close my eyes you dont exist" but if i were to punch you when your eyes are closed and there are no witnesses you dam well feel the punch. You're confusing the philosophical position of solipsism with demonstratable quantum effects.
JaKiri Posted January 26, 2004 Posted January 26, 2004 atinymonkey said in post # :Nietzsche, I thought? http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=solipsism
atinymonkey Posted January 26, 2004 Posted January 26, 2004 Oh, so Nietzsche followed solipsism. What did you expect from someone who pretends they are a monkey?
JaKiri Posted January 26, 2004 Posted January 26, 2004 atinymonkey said in post # :Oh, so Nietzsche followed solipsism. What did you expect from someone who pretends they are a monkey? It was me! I was the turkey all along!
SmokingSkillz Posted January 26, 2004 Posted January 26, 2004 Quantum computing sounds amazing, beyond me but apparently it works and the supersition of a particle can be haressed to create massive computational power not just a load of parallel dimentions with a little of the solution in each!
aommaster Posted January 27, 2004 Posted January 27, 2004 I had a breif look at the whole thread, it may have been answered but i may have not payed attention to it What is the whole experiment trying to prove? Is it tyiing to prve that there is another 'state' apart from dead or alive?
Radical Edward Posted January 27, 2004 Posted January 27, 2004 basically the thought experiment is to show the strangeness of quantum mechanics, and also show that it is not all what we think it is. The state of the cat has to either (a) be possible or (b) not be possible for a reason we haven't figured out yet.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now