Jump to content

Photo
- - - - -

My Schrödinger's Cat


  • Please log in to reply
13 replies to this topic

#1 Silver_rose

Silver_rose

    Gigabyte

  • Members
  • 936 posts
  • LocationLoading...

Posted 04 June 2015 - 06:51 PM

I have been noticing that many people don't have a clear understanding of what Schrödinger's cat is and tend to use it as a vey bad analogy for the polar nature of two options. While I understand that many people will never really need to know what it is all about, but if this is the case, they should never be using it for an analogy without understanding the theoretical concept.
I got the idea for this from something that my little sister said to me, which I found incredibly funny because she's telling me what Schrödinger's cat is all about and I'm the one studying to be a physicist.

 

"the idea of Schrödinger's cat is the idea that something can exist in both forms until you explore the options" - My little sister

 

This is not what Schrödinger's cat is about, this analogy has been dumbed down so far that it loses the essential idea of this theory.

 

I will begin by explaining what Schrödinger's cat really is -
It is a thought experiment that consists of placing a cat into a box, with an atomic timer that releases a toxin when the element in the timer reaches half-life, when the toxin is released, the cat dies. The point of the atomic timer is to make the time in which the toxin is realised arbitrary, you are not meant to know when the toxin is realised and therefore do not know when the cat has died. This leads to the heart of the theory - you can not observe the cat, you can not observe its state and therefore do not know if it is dead or alive. This is analogous of the state of subatomic particles. Something that many people do not know is that all particles have dual states - they can be observed as waves or particles. In fact you or I can be observed as a particle or a wave, it's just our wavelengths are so long we don't bother observing them consciously, or even experimentally. This concept doesn't only hold true to that of photons/electromagnetic waves.

 

Returning to that of Schrödinger's cat, the whole point of the experiment is not to open the box and observe the state at which the cat is in. It is to show the idea that once we observe the cat/particle (because the cat is actually an analogy of a particle/wave), it determines the state at which the particle is in. This concept goes on further to one of the many worlds theory - called the wave function collapse, which I will not go into detail because it does not hold much to the idea behind this thread. But it explains that in the way you observe a particle, it determines in which split reality you exist in; one you live in where you observed it as a wave, the other you observe it as a particle.

 

So, for all of you who thought that Schrödinger's cat is about something existing in both forms until you open the box and explore the options - your thinking is erroneous. Schrodinger's cat isn't about exploring the options after opening the box, it is about the uncertainty of the state the cat is in and you deciding which option to explore, before you open the box and therefore determine the state in which the cat is in.


Because I can...


#2 Affray

Affray

    Knower of things

  • Members
  • 5,753 posts
  • LocationThe Great White North

Posted 04 June 2015 - 07:09 PM

And now I feel like a smarty smart for actually understanding the experiment properly before now.

I would high five myself, but sitting alone in my living room clapping is what I do Friday nights.


It is perfectly acceptable to fear and admire a being you could not possibly understand.


#3 No-Danico

No-Danico

    Danger Zone

  • Members
  • 1,776 posts
  • LocationGA, USA

Posted 04 June 2015 - 07:46 PM

 

Ever since Spleen posted that Civ episode I've watched every one of these. First thing that popped into my mind. Look at her as a catgirl scientist!

 

And now I feel like a smarty smart for actually understanding the experiment properly before now.

I would high five myself, but sitting alone in my living room clapping is what I do Friday nights.

 

You know, I never thought it was misunderstood. No moreso than the square cube principle or weird quantum wave function shit, just more well known. When people on facebook make jokes, then everyone believes they understand something, even if their assumptions run against the grain of truth. IE vaccinations, the word 'literal', how prayers work.


ElectricSevereKatydid.gif

My first novel, Seeds of Magic- Barnes & Noble, Smashwords, Kobo, Sony Store


 


#4 Silver_rose

Silver_rose

    Gigabyte

  • Members
  • 936 posts
  • LocationLoading...

Posted 04 June 2015 - 07:55 PM

Yeah I really only decided to post this when I asked my brother if he knew what the point of the experiment was and all he could do was explain the thought experiment behind the principle - and he did that wrong too.

 

I am fully aware that no one needs to understand it, unless they're doing physics-related study, or hobbies... But I realised if two people in my family don't know what the theoretical concept is, many more people out there - whom do use it as an analogy - are getting it all wrong...


Because I can...


#5 Affray

Affray

    Knower of things

  • Members
  • 5,753 posts
  • LocationThe Great White North

Posted 04 June 2015 - 07:56 PM

I didn't think it would be a big misunderstanding either, but it isn't exactly a conversational topic I happen upon often.


It is perfectly acceptable to fear and admire a being you could not possibly understand.


#6 Calvary

Calvary

    Conceptual

  • Members
  • 6,624 posts
  • Locationwww.

Posted 06 June 2015 - 05:15 PM

This is just the metaphorical equivalent of semantic change.


tumblr_om7nwjm5Wm1rsea1wo1_500.gif
Ask for my discord/Insta/Tumblr if you want.


#7 No-Danico

No-Danico

    Danger Zone

  • Members
  • 1,776 posts
  • LocationGA, USA

Posted 06 June 2015 - 11:36 PM

This is just the metaphorical equivalent of semantic change.

 

I believe this is the metaphorical equivalent of mental masturbation. Or literal, because that apparently means metaphorical nowadays because of kids and their semantic changes. Fucking teenagers. Always playing their hippity hop records on my lawn.


ElectricSevereKatydid.gif

My first novel, Seeds of Magic- Barnes & Noble, Smashwords, Kobo, Sony Store


 


#8 Silver_rose

Silver_rose

    Gigabyte

  • Members
  • 936 posts
  • LocationLoading...

Posted 07 June 2015 - 01:08 AM

We're talking about Quantum mechanics here, a single change in semantics means a whole world of difference.


Because I can...


#9 Calvary

Calvary

    Conceptual

  • Members
  • 6,624 posts
  • Locationwww.

Posted 07 June 2015 - 04:09 AM

I believe this is the metaphorical equivalent of mental masturbation. Or literal, because that apparently means metaphorical nowadays because of kids and their semantic changes. Fucking teenagers. Always playing their hippity hop records on my lawn.

 

I honestly expected you to say 'fucking teenagers, always mentally masturbating on my lawn'  :lol:


tumblr_om7nwjm5Wm1rsea1wo1_500.gif
Ask for my discord/Insta/Tumblr if you want.


#10 The Seldom Seen Kid

The Seldom Seen Kid

    Seldom Seen

  • Members
  • 476 posts
  • LocationEngland

Posted 12 June 2015 - 09:10 AM

It's really not something to get that worked up about though, like loads of analogies commonly used are misquoted or mistranslated, just because this one in particular involves one of the most basic concepts of quantum mechanics doesn't really give it any privilege over others.



#11 Silver_rose

Silver_rose

    Gigabyte

  • Members
  • 936 posts
  • LocationLoading...

Posted 12 June 2015 - 05:49 PM

and now there's something wrong with educating the misinformed?

 

I do think it's something to get worked up over though, I feel people should be told when they're being ignorant, if they continue to believe once they have been told, it is a choice.

 

and I never said that because this basic principal is a fundamental concept in quantum mechanics that it needs to have special attention, I was pointing out that people who use it badly are ignoring the fundamental principal and therefore aren't actually using this principal as an analogy.

It's like saying an apple is like an orange, we know they fucking aren't.


Because I can...


#12 The Seldom Seen Kid

The Seldom Seen Kid

    Seldom Seen

  • Members
  • 476 posts
  • LocationEngland

Posted 13 June 2015 - 05:35 AM

It's like saying an apple is like an orange, we know they fucking aren't.

It's not really though is it? In this situation the analogy has just been generalised to be able to be used in more day to day situations, and still stays somewhat true to the original idea, where as an apple and an orange are completely different. Like would it be reasonable for me to start telling people that they're ignorant because they for example use the quote, 'If a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it does it make a sound' just because philosophy is among one of the things I study and I know that they most likely don't have a large understanding if any of the arguments to do with direct and indirect realism and idealism? No it wouldn't because why should they need to understand something as well as I do to be able to talk about it? Or god forbid mention it in a sentence.



#13 Silver_rose

Silver_rose

    Gigabyte

  • Members
  • 936 posts
  • LocationLoading...

Posted 13 June 2015 - 10:24 AM

It's not really though is it? In this situation the analogy has just been generalised to be able to be used in more day to day situations, and still stays somewhat true to the original idea, where as an apple and an orange are completely different. Like would it be reasonable for me to start telling people that they're ignorant because they for example use the quote, 'If a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it does it make a sound' just because philosophy is among one of the things I study and I know that they most likely don't have a large understanding if any of the arguments to do with direct and indirect realism and idealism? No it wouldn't because why should they need to understand something as well as I do to be able to talk about it? Or god forbid mention it in a sentence.

 

You make it sound like my intention is to dictate what people should talk about.

 

I am being informative.

 

The generalised analogy doesn't stay true to the idea, it completely misses the idea, which is something I've stated twice already.

 

However, as it is, it's your right to believe that it does. The idea of this thread was to explain the actual principal in simple enough terms, which was sparked by the idea of someone using it as a bad analogy. Now if you think it's wrong of me to explain a scientific principal in a scientific area of a forum, then report it and get it removed. Honestly, I really don't want to have to defend my reasoning for writing a thread about something scientific in Science forum.
 


Because I can...


#14 The Seldom Seen Kid

The Seldom Seen Kid

    Seldom Seen

  • Members
  • 476 posts
  • LocationEngland

Posted 13 June 2015 - 10:59 AM

You needn't worry, I have no intention to report this, because as I've stated, I really don't find it something to get worked up over.