Schrodinger's Cat Experiment Proposed

[BlackTigers]

okay, i've been watching these damn quantum physics videos on youtube, and my head hurts now.

Bad.

Fuck entanglement, fuck all these dimensions, it's all a lie.

 

[GodlessAstronomer]

Originally posted by: Analog

Originally posted by: Dumac

"WANTED: Schroedinger's cat. Dead or alive."

Was that always your sig, and you just have a thing for Shroedinger's cat?

EDIT: Also I thought you meant they were going to use an actual cat.

it has been my sig for years.

It's supposed to say "dead AND alive" BTW. I don't understand what this "experiment" is supposed to be testing. No matter what the result is, it will be consistent with the Uncertainty Principle. Sounds like mental masturbation to me, what am I missing?

 

[GagHalfrunt]

Originally posted by: BlackTigers
okay, i've been watching these damn quantum physics videos on youtube, and my head hurts now.

Bad.

Fuck entanglement, fuck all these dimensions, it's all a lie.

Are you kidding, I LOVE the oddities of quantum mechanics. It's just so unbelievably silly and yet still true that it's one of the most amusing things I've ever seen. If you invented quantum mechanics out of thin air nobody would believe a word of it because it's just too damn insane to even be plausible.

 

[GodlessAstronomer]

Originally posted by: SlitheryDee

"Superposition is the term for an object that is not being observed that exists as both possibilities: up and down, dead and alive".

"This allows physicists to observe the matter in two different states at the same time".

I usually try to pretend I know a little bit about quantum physics, but could someone tell me how the fuck that is supposed to work? An object can't be observed in order to be in a superposition, but this somehow allows physicists to observe objects in a superposition?

Before observation the object exists in a superposition of states - the sum of all possible states, each state given by a waveform that is the square of the probability of the object being in that state (normalized so that these probabilities add to one). When the observer makes an observation, the superposition waveform collapses and the object "chooses" a single state. I think that's just a poorly worded passage, we can't observe an object in two states, although we can make other observations that suggest that it has been.

 

[GagHalfrunt]

Originally posted by: GodlessAstronomer

Originally posted by: Analog

Originally posted by: Dumac

"WANTED: Schroedinger's cat. Dead or alive."

Was that always your sig, and you just have a thing for Shroedinger's cat?

EDIT: Also I thought you meant they were going to use an actual cat.

it has been my sig for years.

It's supposed to say "dead AND alive" BTW. I don't understand what this "experiment" is supposed to be testing. No matter what the result is, it will be consistent with the Uncertainty Principle. Sounds like mental masturbation to me, what am I missing?

It's not testing anything, that's the point. It's not a real experiment, it was something Schroedinger dreamed up as a parody to the Copenhagen Interpretation of quantum mechanics. He was pissed off for most of the rest of his life because people didn't get that it was a scornful stab at what he considered to be a ridiculous line of thinking. Most thought it was a real experiment and he wound up sorry he ever got involved in it.

 

[Crono]

I think it's been covered before, but I'm too lazy to Google search: is there a book that simply (low level math only when needed) covers all the basics of quantum mechanics and its history as a field of study until current day?

I'd like to read up, perhaps as on-the-train reading, but could use recommendations.

Granted, I understand that no one actually understands ALL of it, just need the agreed upon essentials.

 

[amdhunter]

I loved the way that dude played the piano on the old Charlie Brown episodes. I didn't know he had a cat.

 

[SKORPI0]

The man has placed his cat in an opaque tank and is slowing pumping it full of poison. Now until the man opens the tank and looks inside, he cannot be sure whether the cat is dead or alive

OK, I think these physicists smoke too much crack and come up with stupid ideas. In the real world, how do you expect a cat to be still alive after pumping a tank full with poison. I would bet it won't be mewing.

Why not put a physicists inside a tank and fill it up with poison (in gaseous form I assume) and wait an hour. Without opening it, i would bet that the chances would be greater that they are more dead than alive.

Schrödinger's cat wiki

 

[GodlessAstronomer]

Originally posted by: Crono
I think it's been covered before, but I'm too lazy to Google search: is there a book that simply (low level math only when needed) covers all the basics of quantum mechanics and its history as a field of study until current day?

I'd like to read up, perhaps as on-the-train reading, but could use recommendations.

Granted, I understand that no one actually understands ALL of it, just need the agreed upon essentials.

There's a book called The Theory of Almost Everything by Robert Oerter which is about the Standard Model. It has the relevant background of quantum mechanics and dives into the Standard Model and shows how it is the most successful scientific theory of all time (and also shows where it falls down). I thought it was a great book.

Also Brian Greene's The Elegant Universe, which is about String Theory but gives a good background to QM.

 

[GodlessAstronomer]

Originally posted by: SKORPI0

The man has placed his cat in an opaque tank and is slowing pumping it full of poison. Now until the man opens the tank and looks inside, he cannot be sure whether the cat is dead or alive

OK, I think these physicists smoke too much crack and come up with stupid ideas. In the real world, how do you expect a cat to be still alive after pumping a tank full with poison. I would bet it won't be mewing.

Why not put a physicists inside a tank and fill it up with poison (in gaseous form I assume) and wait an hour. Without opening it, i would bet that the chances would be greater that they are more dead than alive.

Schrödinger's cat wiki

The article in the OP does an absolutely terrible job of explaining Schrodinger's Cat. The real theory uses a non-deterministic element, usually a particle decay event, to trigger the poison. The fact that we don't know whether this event has occurred is what makes the "magic" happen.

 

[BudAshes]

Originally posted by: CoachB
BudAshes,

I agree the principle is hard to grasp. As I understand it, at the quantum particle level, the mere act of observing affects the state of the particle. Theoretically, it is possible that the cat, by all logic poisoned, lives. OR... until a particle is observed/measured it exists in a "undefined" state. At least that is my layman's take on how the whole idea started.

"Observing it" meaning that we are near it therefore our gravity/energy affects it?

 

[waggy]

Originally posted by: lxskllr

Originally posted by: thehstrybean
That was a total mind fuck

All advanced physics is a mind fuck. I read a book on String Theory that was written for idiots, and I still had a hard time wrapping my brain around the concepts. It's all super fascinating though, and as close as we'll get to real magic in the age of science :^)

the string theory and M-theory just blow my mind. very amazing stuff. wish they would get the hadron collider going so we could find out.

 

[techs]

Fusck. My head just explode.......................

 

[Nerva]

Originally posted by: GodlessAstronomer

Originally posted by: SKORPI0

The man has placed his cat in an opaque tank and is slowing pumping it full of poison. Now until the man opens the tank and looks inside, he cannot be sure whether the cat is dead or alive

OK, I think these physicists smoke too much crack and come up with stupid ideas. In the real world, how do you expect a cat to be still alive after pumping a tank full with poison. I would bet it won't be mewing.

Why not put a physicists inside a tank and fill it up with poison (in gaseous form I assume) and wait an hour. Without opening it, i would bet that the chances would be greater that they are more dead than alive.

Schrödinger's cat wiki

The article in the OP does an absolutely terrible job of explaining Schrodinger's Cat. The real theory uses a non-deterministic element, usually a particle decay event, to trigger the poison. The fact that we don't know whether this event has occurred is what makes the "magic" happen.

that's what i thought as well. something about a chunk of uranium or plutonium emitting an alpha particle (proton) which would trigger the hammer that breaks the bottle of cyanide. but the idea is that your radioactive chunk doesnt always decay by alpha emission so you are not sure if the bottle is broken and thus cat is dead and alive.

not sure if that's right. i am a failed physics major

EDIT: is a virus considered an organism?

 

[deepred98]

Originally posted by: GodlessAstronomer

Originally posted by: Analog

Originally posted by: Dumac

"WANTED: Schroedinger's cat. Dead or alive."

Was that always your sig, and you just have a thing for Shroedinger's cat?

EDIT: Also I thought you meant they were going to use an actual cat.

it has been my sig for years.

It's supposed to say "dead AND alive" BTW. I don't understand what this "experiment" is supposed to be testing. No matter what the result is, it will be consistent with the Uncertainty Principle. Sounds like mental masturbation to me, what am I missing?

Mental Masturbation is fun. M'kay?

 

[Gibsons]

Originally posted by: Hadrian

Originally posted by: GodlessAstronomer

Originally posted by: SKORPI0

The man has placed his cat in an opaque tank and is slowing pumping it full of poison. Now until the man opens the tank and looks inside, he cannot be sure whether the cat is dead or alive

OK, I think these physicists smoke too much crack and come up with stupid ideas. In the real world, how do you expect a cat to be still alive after pumping a tank full with poison. I would bet it won't be mewing.

Why not put a physicists inside a tank and fill it up with poison (in gaseous form I assume) and wait an hour. Without opening it, i would bet that the chances would be greater that they are more dead than alive.

Schrödinger's cat wiki

The article in the OP does an absolutely terrible job of explaining Schrodinger's Cat. The real theory uses a non-deterministic element, usually a particle decay event, to trigger the poison. The fact that we don't know whether this event has occurred is what makes the "magic" happen.

that's what i thought as well. something about a chunk of uranium or plutonium emitting an alpha particle (proton) which would trigger the hammer that breaks the bottle of cyanide. but the idea is that your radioactive chunk doesnt always decay by alpha emission so you are not sure if the bottle is broken and thus cat is dead and alive.

not sure if that's right. i am a failed physics major

EDIT: is a virus considered an organism?

By most definitions viruses aren't considered alive, so I'd say no. But they can be viable or non viable, based on their ability to infect and reproduce, so maybe a suitable subject for this experiment.

nitpick
alpha particle = helium nucleus
/nitpick

 

[ShadowOfMyself]

Originally posted by: DrPizza
This will give people who don't have a clue a little bit of an idea of what's going on. This is just a little bit of an introduction to the weirdness of quantum mechanics:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DfPeprQ7oGc

That was lots of fun until the projector stopped showing an interference padron just because the "eye" was watching

Thats stupid, if you do the exact same experiment in real life, and place a person right behind the projector, theres no way they wont still see the same padron, just because the eye was watching photons individually

I think these people just think too highly of themselves... Altering the universe just because youre watching? LOL

 

[Gibsons]

Originally posted by: ShadowOfMyself

Originally posted by: DrPizza
This will give people who don't have a clue a little bit of an idea of what's going on. This is just a little bit of an introduction to the weirdness of quantum mechanics:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DfPeprQ7oGc

That was lots of fun until the projector stopped showing an interference padron just because the "eye" was watching

Thats stupid, if you do the exact same experiment in real life, and place a person right behind the projector, theres no way they wont still see the same padron, just because the eye was watching photons individually

I think these people just think too highly of themselves... Altering the universe just because youre watching? LOL

We need a facepalm emoticon.

 

[Atomic Playboy]

Originally posted by: GodlessAstronomer

Originally posted by: Analog

Originally posted by: Dumac

"WANTED: Schroedinger's cat. Dead or alive."

Was that always your sig, and you just have a thing for Shroedinger's cat?

EDIT: Also I thought you meant they were going to use an actual cat.

it has been my sig for years.

It's supposed to say "dead AND alive" BTW.

I've argued this for years. The quote becomes a thousand times better when you use "and" instead of "or."

 

[Fenixgoon]

Originally posted by: ShadowOfMyself

Originally posted by: DrPizza
This will give people who don't have a clue a little bit of an idea of what's going on. This is just a little bit of an introduction to the weirdness of quantum mechanics:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DfPeprQ7oGc

That was lots of fun until the projector stopped showing an interference padron just because the "eye" was watching

Thats stupid, if you do the exact same experiment in real life, and place a person right behind the projector, theres no way they wont still see the same padron, just because the eye was watching photons individually

I think these people just think too highly of themselves... Altering the universe just because youre watching? LOL

1) it's pattern. i'm not sure how you spelled it "padron" twice.

2) stupidly smart people have tested this experimentally. if you do it yourself, you will find the same results.

it's just like one of my teachers said "none of this is just made up. people come to these things based on experimental evidence. if you have the same equipment, you could do the exact same thing and see what they saw."

now, that quote was in reference to dislocations in metals, but the same holds true for quantum mechanics (or any science experiment)

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

The cat is both dead and alive in separate universes! Everett was right!

 

[silverpig]

Originally posted by: LifesABeta
WTF. He puts a cat in a tank and puts poison in it and is not sure if the cat is dead or alive. He could only verify if it were taken out and examined.

I know science isn't all about assumptions. But, I think it's really safe to assume that the cat is DEAD AS FUCK. This is the type of shit one thinks about when they're high...

It's because the version in the article is wrong. The way it really goes is this:

Cat in box. With the cat you put a closed vial of poison which will kill the cat dead. You have an opening mechanism on the vial which is triggered by a truly random event - the decay of a certain radioactive isotope. The isotope is chosen such that after some given amount of time (5 minutes say), there is a 50% chance of the vial being triggered and the kitty getting turned inside out.

You close the box and after 5 minutes there's a 50% chance that the kitty is dead. Classically, you'd say it is either dead OR alive, each with 50% probability. Quantum mechanically, the kitty is both dead AND alive, and you won't know which until you open the box and make an observation.

 

[silverpig]

Originally posted by: SlitheryDee

"Superposition is the term for an object that is not being observed that exists as both possibilities: up and down, dead and alive".

"This allows physicists to observe the matter in two different states at the same time".

I usually try to pretend I know a little bit about quantum physics, but could someone tell me how the fuck that is supposed to work? An object can't be observed in order to be in a superposition, but this somehow allows physicists to observe objects in a superposition?

It works if you write the article poorly enough

The second sentence should read something like: "This allows physicists to treat the matter as being in two different states at the same time."

 

[silverpig]

Originally posted by: JasonCoder
We all geek out on different things but my opinion here is who gives. Is this going to lead to a longer lasting light bulb or is it the equivalent of overclocking your cereal?

No quantum = no LEDs, so yeah, longer lasting light bulb

 

[Nerva]

Originally posted by: Gibsons

Originally posted by: Hadrian

Originally posted by: GodlessAstronomer

Originally posted by: SKORPI0

The man has placed his cat in an opaque tank and is slowing pumping it full of poison. Now until the man opens the tank and looks inside, he cannot be sure whether the cat is dead or alive

OK, I think these physicists smoke too much crack and come up with stupid ideas. In the real world, how do you expect a cat to be still alive after pumping a tank full with poison. I would bet it won't be mewing.

Why not put a physicists inside a tank and fill it up with poison (in gaseous form I assume) and wait an hour. Without opening it, i would bet that the chances would be greater that they are more dead than alive.

Schrödinger's cat wiki

The article in the OP does an absolutely terrible job of explaining Schrodinger's Cat. The real theory uses a non-deterministic element, usually a particle decay event, to trigger the poison. The fact that we don't know whether this event has occurred is what makes the "magic" happen.

that's what i thought as well. something about a chunk of uranium or plutonium emitting an alpha particle (proton) which would trigger the hammer that breaks the bottle of cyanide. but the idea is that your radioactive chunk doesnt always decay by alpha emission so you are not sure if the bottle is broken and thus cat is dead and alive.

not sure if that's right. i am a failed physics major

EDIT: is a virus considered an organism?

By most definitions viruses aren't considered alive, so I'd say no. But they can be viable or non viable, based on their ability to infect and reproduce, so maybe a suitable subject for this experiment.

nitpick
alpha particle = helium nucleus
/nitpick

yes you are right. its helium stripped of its electrons