schrodinger's cat

[pianistimo]

now, i happen to be a cat lover - so you can imagine the horror of finding this quantum physics experiment whilst trying to google 'philip bell replica of mozart's piano'

btw, you can wikipedia schrodinger's cat to find the details - of which are horrifying.

but,t hen, i started to think about old instruments and some kind of experiments that would allow them to 'come to life' again.  maybe this experiment in reverse or something.  a dead instrument changed to alive again.

[prometheus]

You shouldn't even try to understand these things. There is no cat.

[pianistimo]

what kind of experiment is testing to see if there will be equal portions of the cat alive as there are dead?  that is what i understand.  now - either way - the cat has sufferred. 

[pianistimo]

now, in googling this in another way - i came up with a residential manor for old people. 

[leucippus]

It's just a
THOUGHT
experiment

 



Only Cheshire cats are used
and they are accustomed
to popping in and out of existence
so it's no big deal 





Really

[maul]

Come on, this is someone who thinks there is an old dude with a white beard who "controls" the "universe", and that a guy name Jesus is going to fly down from the sky and create peace for those who worshipped him in the past 2,000 years. Don't try to explain schrodinger's cat.

[pianistimo]

leucippus,  how do you do it?   this is the second time i am in awe of your graphics and appreciate your explainations.  noone else seemed to want to explain this cat experiment.  now, i am so glad you explained that it was a theoretical experiment.  why didn't they say that at the top?  just wondering.  anyhew, it was a bit disturbing on the thread i found because there was a picture of a live gas cannister, a nucleus expired, and a dead cat.  then on the other side, a live nucleus, a dead gas cannister, and a live cat.  but, i was trying to figure out how a cat would only be half alive.  maybe from being buried?  just a thought.

[thalbergmad]

After Schrodingers cat, you should read Schrodingers kittens.

Equally compelling----------------------------------------NOT

Can't say i ever really understood them, but i am a bit of a spaz.

Thal

[prometheus]

Do you know what Einstein thinks about this?

Einstein thinks that God rolled the dice to see if she is supposed to kill the cat or not.

Bohr disagreed...

[thalbergmad]

I am a Quark brain.

Thal

[pianistimo]

it's seven am - do you know where your brain is?

ps  i am highly suspicious of this person's brain:

www.fuguestatepress.com/stetx.html

[pianolist]

Come on, this is someone who thinks there is an old dude with a white beard who "controls" the "universe", and that a guy name Jesus is going to fly down from the sky and create peace for those who worshipped him in the past 2,000 years. Don't try to explain schrodinger's cat.

I am an old dude with a white beard, and I used to have nine cats. Pianistimo, will you worship me, please?

[mephisto]

ps  i am highly suspicious of this person's brain:

www.fuguestatepress.com/stetx.html

I am extremely suspicious of yours...

[kelly_kelly]

I am extremely suspicious of yours...

Same here...

[thalbergmad]

I am extremely suspicious of yours...

When the 2nd coming happens, she will be proved right about everything.

Thal

[pianolist]

Second coming? What's that? You porn stars are special people.

[berrt]

noone else seemed to want to explain this cat experiment.

In quantum physics, there are conditions which are "normally" one way or the other (eg up/down), in really both states - eg up AND down, "deciding" which way to be only in the moment of measurement. Schrödinger thought of an experiment to bring this phenomenon to a macroscopic state - a quantum device kills a cat (or not). He asked is the cat alive AND dead until you look into the box?

Of course, the cat is alive OR dead, even if noone looks. Responsible is a phenomenon called decorescence, which forces the "decision" when macrosopic things (cats) are involved.

B.

[pianistimo]

very interesting.  only at the moment of measurement.  i never thought of that.  of course, i've never thought of a lot of things.  the last thing on my mind would be to involve a cat in an experiment like this.  why not david blain?  he begs to let people do kinds of things like this to him.  it would be a little bit more 'magical.' 

ps about the second coming - when it happens, it's still not too late!  in the bible it says that everyone who calls on God's name will be saved.  nobody's going anywhere without a little divine help.  and, since he says the dead are rising first - how high can we rise before they rise?  are we in mid-air for a while and then get airvaced higher?  i don't know.  all i know is that God always provides protection for those that 'seek Him while He may be found.'  so, i think - ok - the israelites went out of egypt with a 'high hand'  - must mean that when the time is right - it might be rushed, but everyone will get out no problem.  there will be ' a place ' even if it is the desert.  and we shouldn't complain about leeks when we get there.

[prometheus]

Of course, the cat is alive OR dead, even if noone looks. Responsible is a phenomenon called decorescence, which forces the "decision" when macrosopic things (cats) are involved.

Actually, I think that most physicsts think that the device that kills the cat can only do so after making a measurement. And a measurement collapses the wavefunction.

Macroscopic objects do adhere to the effects of quantum mechanics and they do have uncertaincy. My body is made up by subatomic particles that exist in different states at the same time. In theory a tennis ball could quantum tunnel through a wall.


The uncertaincy is just very small on the macroscopic scale. The Planck's constant is very small in the measures we are used to. So at our level the world doesn't appear to be the way it really is.

[leucippus]

Schrödinger's created his cat experiment in the very early days of the quantum revolution in an attempt to make sense of quantum randomness and uncertainty.   The idea was to pin things down and gain a fundamental understanding of how this quantum randomness and uncertainty actually worked.   Of course, Schrödinger's experiment failed because the randomness and uncertainty actually exist and there is nothing to pin down.

The experiment became famous due to many books that that were publishing using Schrödinger's experiment in an attempt to support an idea of an observer-created reality.  There was a huge misunderstanding by the general public concerning how physicists use the terms "measurement" and "observation".  It was actually an unfortunate use of terms as they should have been speaking in terms of "interactions" instead. 

There is no need for a conscious mind to observe a quantum event in order for it to take place.  This was a huge misunderstanding that many proponents of an observer-created reality quickly jumped on.  Most physicists today do not believe that conscious observations are necessary for quantum events to occur.  So much of the popularity  and interpretations of Schrödinger's cat experiment really wasn't what Schrödinger himself had in mind when he originally came up with these thought experiments.

[prometheus]

I knew that some new age people hijacked these ideas. But I didn't know it was as bad as you seem to suggest it was.

[pianistimo]

so...it's a leap of faith.  kind of confirms God to my way of thinking.  He's not random - but I think He created things to be a little unstable in the present situation so that people would not be able to reach as easily into the unknown.  after all, He'd have nothing left to share.  i think it's a wall between our physical reality and the heavenly realities.  they are not as conformed to time and space it seems.  although they share some realities.  but, if they, also will be wrapped up as a cloak - then they can compress and collapse into something very small as well.  otherwise the sky wouldn't be mentioned in the bible as collapsing as a tent with the pegs pulled up.'  somewhere in job, i think.

so quantum physics is basically as pure as biblical interpretation.  no real difference.  you either believe it and it is true - or you believe it and it is false  - or you don't believe it until you see it.   

[leucippus]

I knew that some new age people hijacked these ideas. But I didn't know it was as bad as you seem to suggest it was.

Yes, it was pretty "bad", (depending on your point of view).  From a purely scientific point of view it was pretty bad because it started a lot of incorrect myths about what serious scientists were actually thinking about.  However, from an entertainment point of view, and from a purely philosophical point of view I'm quite sure that many people enjoy reading about these ideas proposed in those books.  It was only "bad" in the sense that it made it look like mainstream science was actually supporting these views as being "the most likely conclusions" when if fact they were not.

A couple things to keep in mind is that during that time in history (when the books popularized this) several different things were "in the air" so to speak.  First, as you say, the new age ideas were quite popular as well as eastern mysticism.  Secondly, people were still dealing with the impact of Einstein's Relativity and time dilation.   And probably the most profound influence is that people were quite disillusioned with the failure of classical Newtonian physics to deal with the problem (i.e. its inability to explain things in terms of a definite state of determinism).

Schrödinger's original intention was to use his cat experiment to pin down the determinism.  In other words, he was looking for a way to avoid randomness and uncertainty.  But it turned out that his attempt was futile as it's pretty conclusive now that the world actually does operated on principles of randomness and uncertainty at the quantum level.  It's not merely a lack of understanding on our part, but rather it's the genuine state of affairs.  In other words, Schrödinger's thought experiment actually failed to produce and definite results, other than to confirm that randomness and uncertainty are indeed the way things operate at the quantum level.   However, Schrödinger himself did not put the idea of an "observer-created reality" on his experiment.  That was the work of others who for all intents and purposes didn't really understand what Schrödinger was trying to get at.

There are actually quite a few different possible explanations for the quantum randomness and uncertainty, none of which have been confirmed.   As it stands right now scientists simply don't know the answer yet.   Moreover, they may never find the answer if they continue to head in the direction they are currently heading (i.e. String Theory and the likes)

I have my own theories on this, unfortunately they are quite different from mainstream physics.  I say that this is unfortunate because it's pretty much impossible to bounce my ideas off of any educated scientists because they are too far down the wrong path.  Moreover, my ideas involve some major changes in the foundation of mathematical formalism that no one even remotely wants to consider.  In short, the time is just not ripe yet for the correct path to be taken so there's nothing left to do but wait.  By that time I'll be dead and gone so it's not going to matter much to me anyway.  

So I've decided to start playing the piano instead.  

[pianistimo]

do both!  write a book.  seems that science is always based on the experiments or thoughts that someone else came up with and expanded upon.  why not be the first in the next generation of textbooks (30 years from now).  i say - you should write if you have studied this your entire life.

that is like me saying that i will not touch the piano again because i now hate my kawaii - which i do now because people have put recordings of better sounding pianos.  at the time, it was all i knew.  now, i know better.  faziolis are it.  when will i afford that?  when i am dead.  should i quit?  no.  i cannot.  just as you know you cannot.  it is an everconsuming process of our minds.  our minds rotate like moons around planets at night.  yours about physics and music - mine about gardening and music.  and, probably a few other things. 

anyway.  all great people never gave up.  this is what i tell my son practically every day.  he's really smart -but gives up on things too easily.  i think the difference between finding eurekas can be the last minute or two. 

[leucippus]

so...it's a leap of faith.

Well, that's not the way scientists work.  They haven't leaped to any conclusion.  The fact is that mainstream science simply doesn't know the answer yet.  That's the real truth of the situation and professional physicists worth his salt would readily agree with this.

Here's a quote from Dr. Richard Feynman (one of the greatest physicists of the 20th century)

"I think it is safe to say that no one understands quantum mechanics. 
Do not keep saying to yourself, if you can possibly avoid it,  "But how can it be like that?"
because you will go "down the drain" into a blind alley from which nobody has yet escaped.
Nobody knows how it can be like that."

To the best of my knowledge this is the current state of affairs with the scientific study of quantum mechanics.  In fact, I'm absolutely certain that if any major breakthrough had been made since Dr. Feynman said these words the whole world would know about it.  The person's name who made the discovery would be known by just about everyone and he or she would be considered the latest Einstein or Newton. 

The bottom line is that currently scientists really don't yet have an answer.  So it's not a matter of making a leap of faith.  It's a matter of just not yet knowing the answer.  But they are working on it.

He's not random - but I think He created things to be a little unstable in the present situation so that people would not be able to reach as easily into the unknown.  after all, He'd have nothing left to share. 

I can appreciate and respect your belief in a specific deity defined by religious doctrines.  However, I'm afraid I can't share your view of such a deity being so human-like in the way "he" thinks and behaves.   In fact the whole idea of giving a gender to such an entity is pretty absurd to me.  I personally believe that was just the result of those who wrote the doctrines and how they thought about males being the ultimate rulers.

I'm not saying that I don't believe in spirituality.  I just have a huge problem with the idea of an individual godhead that acts like a judgmental Santa Claus who knows who's been naughty or nice and will delve out presents or punishments accordingly.   

I'm not saying that such a picture can't be true.  It just seems like such a trivial notion for an entity that is capable of creating the entire universe that we observe.   My conclusion is that those doctrine were actually written by men who created this Santa Claus type of deity in their own imaginations.

so quantum physics is basically as pure as biblical interpretation.  no real difference.  you either believe it and it is true - or you believe it and it is false  - or you don't believe it until you see it.   

Science is an ongoing study.  We simply don't have the full picture yet.  Whether we ever will get a full picture is hard to know.  I don't pit science against spirituality.  I believe in both.  Science is merely the study of our existence (to the best we can achieve), and spiritual entities is what we'd like to believe that we ultimately are.

Some things that have come out of science have pretty much convinced me that we are indeed spiritual creatures.

For example, the discovery that energy and matter are interchangeable (i.e. the same stuff) seems to me to be all the prove we need to realize that we are already creatures of pure energy.  There is no such thing as matter, other than being energy in a bound state.  We are all creatures of pure energy.

Moreover, Relativity has shown us that time and space on not separate entities.  Most people don't really comprehend the significance of that.  Space and time are the same thing.  They too, are interchangeable just like energy and matter.  There is no such thing as space or time alone.  All that exists is spacetime as a whole entity in its own right.

There is so much more to this.  I can scientifically prove that we can never cease to exist.

And yes, I have started writing a book on this, but I've lost enthusiasm.   It's like I really don't care whether other people hear these ideas or not anymore.   What's the point?  If my ideas lead to any great discoveries they'd probably use that knowledge to make a new bomb to blow each other up.   Better off to just play the piano and forget about science.  Let the human race evolve for a few more millennia until they mature enough to handle the knowledge better.

I'm pretty disillusioned with world leaders of just about every country on Earth, especially my own. 

[pianistimo]

wow.  spacetime.  my son and i were talking about newer cars (fuel efficient) and he was saying something about toyota now getting 31 ? miles per gallon in one of it's cars.  i said, what if you could just be teleported.  now, the concept of teleporting would be spacetime, right? 

sorry to be such a tease.  i really don't know much about science - but i like conversing with you and others about it anyway.  i feel like on pianostreet there is such a wealth of combined knowledge.  it's like a library.  if you want a certain information - there are specific people you can ask.  it's really great!  and, these people are from all over the world.

sure, we may be somewhat tied to our nations - but we really do have a worldwide knowledge base, now.  and with languages so easily translated - there is a lot of stuff to sift through.  musically, i am enthralled by the recent finding of the beethoven's 'grosse fugue.'  i want to hear this asap. and, i want to see the score - as it was fairly close - but moved to julliard's library now.  the problem is, whenever i start liking detailed work - the family suffers.

[thalbergmad]

  i really don't know much about science

I would never have guessed.

Thal

[pianistimo]

well, i've done a few experiments.  a mouse-trap car with cd's for wheels.  water bottle rockets.  and, some kind of magnetic experiement which i forgot but had to do with pepper on water and separating it with something or other. 

my parents used to make wine and beer occasionally.  mad science is the best!

[thalbergmad]

well, i've done a few experiments. 

Me too, and i discovered that it is possible to set fire to your farts, albeit inadvisable.

Thal

[pianistimo]

thanks to you, i just remembered i left a candle burning.

[thalbergmad]

All the nice girls love a candle.

Reminds me of a famous English Navy Shanty.

Thal

[pianistimo]

yes.  the whole family farts.  except me.

[thalbergmad]

Do you think that Jesus ever farted.

I can find no reference in the Bible.

Thal

[pianolist]

I'm not sure about Jesus, but his dad farts. The Germans regularly address him as Unser Farter.

[pianowolfi]

I'm not sure about Jesus, but his dad farts. The Germans regularly address him as Unser Farter.

Do you know who was the first tuba player? 'Unser Vater der Tubist in dem Himmel'

HAAAAAAHHHHAAAAAHHHAAA!!!!!

[pianistimo]

?  He's spirit.  therefore cannot physically fart.

ahh yes.  and now, who is half alive and half dead?  mine fater  (schubert)  no wonder the erlking died!  his fater was a fater.

[pianowolfi]

?  He's spirit.  therefore cannot physically fart.

ahh yes.  and now, who is half alive and half dead?  mine fater  (schubert)  no wonder the erlking died!  his fater was a fater.

But it wasn't the earlking who died. It was the child.

[pianistimo]

oh. yes.  i just remembered that.  ok.  but why did the child die?  which fater was he referring to?  hmm.  makes you wonder, huh!

[pianowolfi]

oh. yes.  i just remembered that.  ok.  but why did the child die?  which fater was he referring to?  hmm.  makes you wonder, huh!

Ok the whole story. A man is riding through a forest with his little child. The child is scared. The child hears the earlking ( the translation is 'king of the elves', actually not 'earls') whispering:'come with me, we'll play together' the child tells his father, but he doesn't believe his son. He says it's just the wind blowing through the trees. Earlking begins his second attempt: 'We'll have a great time together on the beach and you'll met my beautiful daughters.' again the boy tells his father, if he didn't see earlking's daughters. but daddy doesn't believe him and tells him oh that are just the old willows shining greyly. Then earlking starts his final attack and tells the child: 'and if you don't want to come with me I'll use violence' The little boy screems loudly. Now finally the father begins to be concerned, rides faster and comes to his farm. But it's too late. The child has died.  It's actually a sad story.

[pianistimo]

what if it WAS the erkling?  one of those silent deadly ones. 

[dnephi]

As I said on the other thread, the idea of a macroscopic object being in a state of indeterminacy is patent nonsense.  The explanation is that quantum information either leaks out of the box, or that other observation happens, IE the cat.

[prometheus]

Isn't that in contradiction with the Copenhagen Interpretation?

[dnephi]

Isn't that in contradiction with the Copenhagen Interpretation?

My Quantum Mechanics textbook says so.  I can go get it and post it tomorrow if you'd like, but I don't want to hassle and I don't care that much.