So, to put it more succinctly, while the cat is in the box, the battery is both 
dead and alive. Which explains why I hit my remote if it doesn't work (WORK, 
damn you!). Have I got that right?

On Jun 18, 2013, at 5:31 AM, "Mike Palij" <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Mon, 17 Jun 2013 20:51:17 -0700, Carol DeVolder wrote:
>> What would Schrodinger say--the cat is neither dead nor alive, it just
>> needs to be recharged?
> 
> Well this is a little complicated but if one reads the Wikipedia entry on
> Schrodinger's cat the following paraphrase of the situation, I think,
> provides the appropriate analogy:
> 
> |Schrödinger's cat: a robotic cat with a limited battery life is placed
> |in a sealed box. If an internal monitor detects a prolonged period of
> lack of the cat's movement, the battery is dead. The Copenhagen
> |interpretation of quantum mechanics implies that after a while, the
> |cat is simultaneously powered  and unpowered. Yet, when one
> |looks in the box, one sees the cat either powered and active or
> |unpowered and inactive, not both powered/alive and unpowered/dead.
> |This poses the question of when exactly quantum superposition ends
> |and reality collapses into one possibility or the other.
> See:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schroedinger%27s_cat
> 
> To make the Schrodinger's cat situation more sensible, consider the
> following quote from the Wikipedia entry:
> 
> |To further illustrate, Schrödinger describes how one could, in
> |principle, transpose the superposition of an atom to large-scale
> |systems. He proposed a scenario with a cat in a sealed box,
> |wherein the cat's life or death depended on the state of a subatomic
> |particle. According to Schrödinger, the Copenhagen interpretation
> |implies that the cat remains both alive and dead (to the universe
> |outside the box) until the box is opened. Schrödinger did not wish
> |to promote the idea of dead-and-alive cats as a serious possibility;
> |quite the reverse, the paradox is a classic reductio ad absurdum.[2]
> |The thought experiment illustrates quantum mechanics and the
> |mathematics necessary to describe quantum states. Intended as
> |a critique of just the Copenhagen interpretation (the prevailing
> |orthodoxy in 1935), the Schrödinger cat thought experiment remains
> |a typical touchstone for limited interpretations of quantum mechanics.
> |Physicists often use the way each interpretation deals with Schrödinger's
> |cat as a way of illustrating and comparing the particular features,
> |strengths, and weaknesses of each interpretation.
> 
> And mind the nuts and bolts.
> 
> -Mike Palij
> New York University
> [email protected]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ---
> You are currently subscribed to tips as: [email protected].
> To unsubscribe click here: 
> http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=177920.a45340211ac7929163a0216244443341&n=T&l=tips&o=26123
> or send a blank email to 
> leave-26123-177920.a45340211ac7929163a0216244443...@fsulist.frostburg.edu

---
You are currently subscribed to tips as: [email protected].
To unsubscribe click here: 
http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=26124
or send a blank email to 
leave-26124-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu

Reply via email to