▲ 255 ▼ alan tur(ule)ing (thelemmy.club) submitted 3 weeks ago by bin0mial@lemmy.ml to c/onehundredninetysix@lemmy.blahaj.zone 9 comments fedilink hide all child comments its a shame how the british govt treated him, he was an extraordinary man
[–] yetAnotherUser@lemmy.ca 4 points 3 weeks ago (1 child) So, according to Schrödinger, the cat is either dead or alive, and you just don't know its state until you open the box? Is that it? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] rtxn@lemmy.world 11 points 3 weeks ago* (2 children) What you described is more or less consistent with Schrödinger's views. In the Copenhagen interpretation, a quantum system is described by a wave function (the probability density of all of its possible states; the cat is maybe dead and maybe alive) until it is observed, at which point it collapses into one of its possible states (the cat is definitively dead or definitively alive). As far as I can tell, in Schrödinger's views, there is no superposition and there is no collapse, and a system is described directly by its wave function, which changes over time. But this is all just interpretation. I don't even know where to start looking for empirical evidence that supports one or the other, or whether there's even a point philosophizing about it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de 1 point 1 day ago AFAIK at this point it's pretty clear that nothing special happens to the cat while it's in the box, simply because it's on waaaaaaaaaaay too large a scale for the whole thing to be in a superposition. to properly hold a superposition like that you have to do nutty shit like cool the environment to within fractions of a degree of 0K and measure the spin of individual protons or whatever permalink fedilink source parent [+] applebusch@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 point 3 weeks ago [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent
[–] rtxn@lemmy.world 11 points 3 weeks ago* (2 children) What you described is more or less consistent with Schrödinger's views. In the Copenhagen interpretation, a quantum system is described by a wave function (the probability density of all of its possible states; the cat is maybe dead and maybe alive) until it is observed, at which point it collapses into one of its possible states (the cat is definitively dead or definitively alive). As far as I can tell, in Schrödinger's views, there is no superposition and there is no collapse, and a system is described directly by its wave function, which changes over time. But this is all just interpretation. I don't even know where to start looking for empirical evidence that supports one or the other, or whether there's even a point philosophizing about it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de 1 point 1 day ago AFAIK at this point it's pretty clear that nothing special happens to the cat while it's in the box, simply because it's on waaaaaaaaaaay too large a scale for the whole thing to be in a superposition. to properly hold a superposition like that you have to do nutty shit like cool the environment to within fractions of a degree of 0K and measure the spin of individual protons or whatever permalink fedilink source parent [+] applebusch@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 point 3 weeks ago [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de 1 point 1 day ago AFAIK at this point it's pretty clear that nothing special happens to the cat while it's in the box, simply because it's on waaaaaaaaaaay too large a scale for the whole thing to be in a superposition. to properly hold a superposition like that you have to do nutty shit like cool the environment to within fractions of a degree of 0K and measure the spin of individual protons or whatever permalink fedilink source parent
