/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.1472824]

This has probably been asked before but can somebody explain Schrödinger's cat to me?

[Anonymous No.1472832]

1.put your cat in the microwave.
2.observe

[Anonymous No.1472837]

i can and can't explain it to you

[Anonymous No.1472839]

>>1472824

pure physicists bullshit

[Anonymous No.1472844]

Isn't that a paradox?

Any who a quick search on your favorite search engine or a quick trip to the library would probably answer all your questions.

[Anonymous No.1472845]

>>1472837
Will he know before he listens if you did or did not explain it?

[Anonymous No.1472846]

Observing an event can change the outcome of the event.

[Anonymous No.1472850]

>>1472837

[Anonymous No.1472862]

I think its something along the lines that if you place a cat in a box where it may or may not die, it is both alive and dead at the same time until you look inside the box.

[Anonymous No.1472863]

It wouldn't work, because of quantum decoherence in large objects, so you would have to cool to cat to nearly absolute zero in order to put it into a superposition.

[Anonymous No.1472866]

>>1472846
Bingo

[Skunkworks !e1337Hykks No.1472872]

Put a cat in a box with something that will kill it based on quantum phenomena. (Theoretically I suppose even starvation and asphyxia qualify, at least their exact timing)

The cat is now alive and dead at the same time, until you observe it.

[Anonymous No.1472873]

>>1472863
whats superposistion?

[Anonymous No.1472880]

Schrödinger was unsold on the Copenhagen Interpretation of quantum mechanics, which says that quantum events are dependent on perception. So he postulated a thought experiment where a radioactive particle has a 50-50 chance of decaying in a prescribed amount of time. If the particle decays, then it triggers a geiger counter which triggers a hammer which smashes a jar of toxic gas. If this occurs, the gas kills a cat placed next to the geiger-hammer machine. If the particle doesn't decay, then the cat doesn't die. The Copenhagen Interpretation basically concludes that while unobserved, the cat will be simultaneously alive and dead, and only once it becomes observed will these two possibilities collapse into a single position.

Schrödinger thought this was ludicrous, which is the purpose of the thought experiment, to essentially discredit the Copenhagen Interpretation.

[Anonymous No.1472897]

[Anonymous No.1472899]

>>1472872
I understood the theory but I've always had a hard time grasping the concept of random. Is there anything random in our world? Everything is based off certain variables and I'm pretty damn sure there's no way to have a random outcome around a life and death scenario about a cat in a box.

[Anonymous No.1472902]

>>1472899
It's random that the cat will kill itself, is it not?

[Skunkworks !e1337Hykks No.1472907]

>>1472873
A mixture of two states. Such a sine wave superimposed on a triangle wave.

>>1472863
It's important to remember that quantum decoherence theoretically does not always apply. There is an infinitesimally small (but theoretically non-zero) chance that every radioisotope in the cat will decay at once, killing it, etc.

[Anonymous No.1472909]

>>1472899
Doesn't random only come in to play in the circumstance/presence of a conscious being?

[Niveus !qyCeV9YlYI No.1472910]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Broglie%E2%80%93Bohm_theory

[Anonymous No.1472918]

>>1472880
i get it now you are a bamf sir thank you :D

[Anonymous No.1472919]

>>1472880
that's fucktarded. a cat being alive or dead, is no different on a fundamental level, then a tiny paddle being both moving and not moving at the same time, WHICH HAS BEEN DONE.

http://www.nature.com/news/2010/100317/full/news.2010.130.html

however, from what i understand there are tons of techinal challenges to putting larger and larger objects into superposition.

[Anonymous No.1472926]

>>1472910
FUCK YOU AND YOUR FUCKING PILOT WAVES, YOU FUCKING FAGGOT.

[Skunkworks !e1337Hykks No.1472927]

>>1472899
Well the cat shows what happens when quantum effects govern larger things.

I can give you an atom of uranium (lol) that is supposed to decay in an average of 4 billion years, but there is nothing to say that it won't decay the instant I give it to you, or in 10 trillion years.

ALSO I UNDERSTAND THE PHYSIC, I UNDERSTAND THE DEAD CAT

[Anonymous No.1472934]

The cat isn't simultaneously dead and alive, it should be assumed alive until the status quo has been proven to be changed.

[Skunkworks !e1337Hykks No.1472945]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mC8Vh76vy0w

[Anonymous No.1472946]

I don't think this actually applies to this situation. I think it's just supposed to be an analogy to the wave-like properties of sub-atomic/elementary particles. For example, electrons in their orbitals are everywhere in the orbital at the same time.

[Anonymous No.1472949]

>>1472918

You're welcome.

Just want to add that Einstein agreed with Schrödinger on this problem. Not that appeal to authority is relevent in this context, but a fun fact, none-the-less.

[Anonymous No.1472951]

In developing QM, Schrödinger and Co. eventually ran into problem differentiating between information and ontology/existence at the quantum level. This got to the point where the most self-consistent way to think about a system was to say that the "reality" of a certain object or event was equivalent to the total information available about it.

At the quantum level, where there are fewer preconceptions, this is not so hard to accept. The cat thought experiment shows that if we scale up to a "real world" scenario the information=reality idea becomes rather counter-intuitive, forcing us to make ridiculous statements like "the cat is simultaneously alive and dead".

There's no big conclusion; adjust your personal interpretation of QM as necessary.

[Anonymous No.1472962]

[Anonymous No.1472977]

>>1472899
Simulation of many identical atoms undergoing radioactive decay,

This is essentially the closest you're getting to random.

[Anonymous No.1473008]