Post things that don't make sense. >pic related the cat can't be alive and dead at the same time it's either or
I don't believe in quantum mechanics
>>21718878But I'm right
>>21718889If you assume the state, the observation can change the result.
>>21718880try to kill yourself. you will not be able to.
>>21718875adle avdelead devale ad di vale da vi da da le vidaThe cat is living the life OP. "Science" is wrong again.
>>21718875does this count. happened to me a few nights ago.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AtnD_KVJSQs
>>21718875>I give you a cat>I tell you a cat is insideYou don't know if the cat is alive or not, therefore it is both
>>21718875It tells you something about the rules of our umiverse, as long as there is no observer things COULD be, or COULD NOT be, but by observing you define certain outcomesthats why you shouldnt be too noisy about whats in the box or you might kill w/e inside
>>21718991No that's factually wrong, whether or not I see it it's either dead or alive not both. You aren't both dead and alive just because someone doesn't see you.
>>21718875Schrödingers cat is an analogy, describing how quantum particles behave. It doesn't describe how a cat in a box behaves1
>>21719034Then the analogy is wrong.
ITT: /x/ singlehandedly BTFO quantum physicists We should fire all professors and hire /x/tards to teach at universities instead.
>>21719034Quantum particles don't behave that way, though. It's not observation that's affecting them, it's the mechanism by which we observe, ie displacing it with photons.
>>21718880Quantum Mechanics don't believe in you either.
>>21718875Pure reason is confined by it's own language and thus rooted in axioms as you can always ask why ad infinitum. The usage of axioms is illogical by the rules of reason itself, thus reason ultimately makes no sense, although it is useful as a tool. Reality itself is post-rational as it does not need explanation, because explanation is a human invention.
>>21719117Chain of consequences are part of reality, those make logical sense.
>>21719039Nope its for brainlets and OP is proof that theyre struggling to wrap their head around it
>>21719063Can something be observed without the observer somehow interacting with it?
>>21719063That is literally how they behave. The act of observing them affects how they act. The mechanism is irrelevant because in order to be observed, it must be interacted with.>>21719028You're not supposed to think of it at the scale of a cat, you're supposed to think about it at the quantum scale. At the quantum scale, the act of observing a thing has an effect on that thing. Whatever it was doing before, it was doing, but now that we've observed it it's doing something else.
Schrodinger put forward the idea of the cat in the box to demonstrate how quantum physics are inapplicable to entities on a macro level, its meant to sound stupid and illogical. but of course fucking idiots like to pick it up and parrot it to sound clever.
>>21719220>the act of observing a thing has an effect on that thing. No it doesn't, that's just an illusion, like covering your eyes and thinking that nobody can see you.#QuantumSkeptic
>>21719374What makes you a skeptic?
Why didn't Schrodinger just flip a coin? Why did he invent an elaborate setup to potentially kill a cat?
>>21719034It might be for the cat as well. Quantum mechanics don't stop where your feelings begin.
>>21719503Coin flip is more deterministic than radioactive decay, which is a purely mathematical probability.
>>21718875The cat is a poor analogy that was once given for quantum states, pop sci did what it does and made bad information popular
>>21719518You mean they were dead serious about how this worked, then they got it fucking wrong and instead of blaming themselves for being idiots they blame the people that listened to them.
>>21718875The laws of the universe are pretty mundane and small. When you go beyond their boundaries nothing makes any sense. We're in a bubble of spacetime that is loosely held together. Makes you wonder what else inhabits the infinite.
The shit with the tree freaked me out the first time I heard about it. When a tree falls and nobody is around to hear it etc.
>>21719529Nope. The cat was an example used to demonstrate how silly it would be to apply quantum principles to macro objects. Then the public got.hols of the idea and proceeded to reinterpret it as if the idea had been presented for the exact opposite purpose. Not that I expect idiots on /x to ever know what they're talking about.
It Is not in a superposition. But in order for the proposed model to work, we ASSUME that the cat is in a superposition. Everyone knows it's bullshit, but they developed the whole modern physics around this fals assumption and it's hard to get rid of it.Same with Special Relativity. It's all bs.
>>21719580Let's see.The original analogy:"One can even set up quite ridiculous cases. A cat is penned up in a steel chamber, alongwith the following device (which must be secured against direct interference by the cat):in a Geiger counter there is a tiny bit of radioactive substance, so small, that perhaps inthe course of the hour one of the atoms decays, but also, with equal probability, perhapsnone; if it happens, the counter tube discharges and through a relay releases a hammerwhich shatters a small flask of hydrocyanic acid. If one has left this entire system toitself for an hour, one would say that the cat still lives if meanwhile no atom hasdecayed. The psi-function of the entire system would express this by having in it theliving and dead cat (pardon the expression) mixed or smeared out in equal parts.It is typical of these cases that an indeterminacy originally restricted to the atomicdomain becomes transformed into macroscopic indeterminacy, which can then beresolved by direct observation. That prevents us from so naively accepting as valid a"blurred model" for representing reality. In itself it would not embody anything unclearor contradictory. There is a difference between a shaky or out-of-focus photograph anda snapshot of clouds and fog banks."
>>21719220Light is the "observer", not people. A person has no influence on quantum particles by looking at them. I do think however that we somehow manipulate everything at the quantum level with our thoughts, our conscious intent, but that it's not understood how yet. Anyone who's tripped balls would probably agree, but science definitely hasn't figured it out yet
>>21719529Were you born retarded or did it happen over time? Other anon responded with what I would have responded with so I'm just going to mock you for being a dumbass
>>21718875Bloody christ, you are stupid.
>>21719730Take five seconds of you glorious existence and read this >>21719695He expected the scenario to be unpredictable.
>>21719766No, I'll translate his big-brain words into little-brain words for you. He's saying that the mathematical model as described by quantum mechanics doesn't apply in the macro world.>The psi-function of the entire system would express this by having in it theliving and dead cat (pardon the expression) mixed or smeared out in equal parts.It is typical of these cases that an indeterminacy originally restricted to the atomicdomain becomes transformed into macroscopic indeterminacy, which can then beresolved by direct observation. That prevents us from so naively accepting as valid a"blurred model" for representing reality.>The maths would say that the cat is existing in a dual living/dead state. This is obviously wrong, but the math would translate it as so, even on macroscopic scales where it is ridiculous. This prevents us from just applying it willy-nilly to reality - there is something fundamentally "quantum" about the microscopic world that isn't true about the macro world.The last two sentences, same deal. He's saying the math would check out but its application needs context.
So does it mean it is uncertain if the cat is alive or dead or does it say it's both? Which the later is retarded since you can't be alive and dead at the same time you are either or.
>>21718875>the cat can't be alive and dead at the same timeThis is easy to deal with. Close eyes and shoot the box. Never open box, cat is now double alive and double dead AT THE SAME TIME. Never open box again, that is important. For added special quantum coolness never open eyes either.
>>21719823KYS is the only way we can be sure your stupidity doesn't reach future generations.
>>21719829Look you are either clinically dead or alive you can't be both. Schrödinger was just and idiot if he thinks you can he dead and alive at the same time lol
>>21718880Yeah me either. These particles aren't LITERALLY statistical entities, like everyone seems to believe. We just can't measure them precisely, so we have to generalize them that way.
>>21718875>ADLEAVEDEWhat did they mean by this?
>>21719806The application need context because they weren't sure what would happen hence the indeterminacy.Look I deal with thick headed phisics in the regular, if they could have made that experiment they would have and won't tell anybody that they fucked up and killed a cat.
>>21719837Which obviously, he didn't. He's saying the math is only as smart as the person using it.
>physicists believe you can be dead and alive at the same timeonly very smart people can believe something so stupid
Lets start with the basic concept of quantum physics. These particles are so small that to merely even detect and measure them can greatly change their properties.Concepts such as heisenbergs uncertainty principle are important because we dont know any means of "seeing" these particles. You cant just put a microscope on them. We used radiation to see the smallest objects to pass through/bounce back to sensors. But quantum particles ARE the objects that comprise of radiation. What are you gonna do? Bounce a photon on a photon? 1) Good luck figuring out where its at when its literally the fastest thing in the universe and extremely small 2) Good luck considering those results accurate as you just smashed an equally massive photon and now theyre bouncing around in erratic directions.My point is, to observe these things is a bitch. And when we do, we fundamentally change/destroy the particles we observe due to our lack of technology. Quantum particles can display some time weirdness, and schrodingers cat is just a macroscopic extrapolation of it. It wont work IRL cause 1) The cat isnt a quantum particle 2) Information WILL get out of any environment that we isolate it in.Consider the string theory that says theres 9 dimensions. We only percieve 3 spatial dimensions due to the possibility that the other 5/6 are too small to affect us. The same can be said for this time weirdness in quantum particles
>>21718875Fucking brainlet. The cat is a crude metaphor for quantum superposition. Either way, the cat is very much either dead or alive if you run this "experiment", because the Geiger counter would collapse the probability wave.>>21718880Explain the double-slit experiment.
This is retarded to think that something doesn't exist until confirmed by an intelligent form of life. However, if it really was the case, the contrary would be possible too: if enough people were conviced of the existence of something that truly don't exist, it should be enough to realboot it. And that would mean, everyone of us has a tiny fragment of omnipotence inside of us, a fragment of divinity that would allow us to overturn this universe laws by creating something ex nihilo and allow living beings to be dead and alive in the same moment.This is bullshit.
>>21718875Congrats, you have a brain that is grounded in reality and understands the amount of variable in that scenario. How chonk is the cat? What if it grew up in Chernobyl? >>21719969>Explain the double-slit experiment.Constructive and destructive interference of dielectric pulses (more arbitrarily known as an "electron"). They "change paths" because the observations are flawed in the first place. >>21719016No it doesn't it's a thought experiment with no basis in reality. >>21719034>>21719063>>21719064There is no such thing as a "particle". Slapping the word "Quantum" next to them doesn't make them exist anymore. It's a convenient nomenclature to regard things as having quantity even if they actually don't.
>>21720779>Constructive and destructive interferenceWell, you got that part right.
>>21718875OP is unironically correct. There is no such thing as the cat being both dead and alive. Its either or, but you cannot know until measure it.Fucking brainlets think that the superposition of quantum states is literally being a state of everything all at once. Whats it like having 80 IQ?
>>21720797What was the part I got wrong? The "electron" part? It's an abstraction bro.
>>21720812It's a discrete individual particle that changes path because of a probabilistic interference and which results in a wave-like impact dispersion even when one at a time is fired at the double-slit.
>>21720831>It's a discreteNo>individual particleNo>that changes path because of a probabilistic interference"we don't know". > and which results in a wave-like impact dispersion even when one at a time is fired at the double-slit.Waves of what?
you niggers denying schrodinger's cat being dead and alive need to stop getting high off of the lie of object permanence
>>21720896"no""discrete" from what?>>21720901>you can't deny an abstract thought experiment that doesn't even account for the immense amount of variables such as the material of the box, health of the cat, etc.Why?
>>21718875Is this the level of Newfags on /x/ they can't even grasp basic thought experiments on quantum physics? No wonder this place has gone to shit.
>>21718875"Gravity is the mass of an object that bends space and time creating a hole""See atoms are like very small grains of sand, and when you break one apart, alot of energy comes out""The are not 3 dimensions but maybe as many as 10, 7 of which we can not perceive. This explains the fact that some of the basic forces of nature are so weak""Stars are these biiig balls of fire""The root of all human trade relations is the exchange of women">the image of a chimp like creature eventually walking straight with human anatomical features"Before the big bang there was nothing, nit even laws of physics">Freud and "sexuality""Our brains are like these complex computers"And there are so many moreThese simplifications given to the people uneducated in the subjects are not made or spoken to make you understand the real scientifc mechanics of the thing. They're said to awe you and maybe inspire you to research a bit more into it or maybe even study it one day, and really coming to understand the math or symbology behind those sentences you can relate to, because they use your everyday words and (only apparently) ideas
The moon is only there if someone looks at it?
>>21722076>The moon is only there if someone looks at it?Peek-a-Boo for scientists.
>>21719958This is a good breakdown. The "cat in the box" thought experiment is basically a reductio ad absurdum argument that Shrödinger proposed. Obviously though, a cat isn't a quantum particle and if you study quantum physics at all, you'll realize that physics begin to work very differently when you get down to the quantum scale. There is a distinct gap in how we describe day-to-day scale physics (classical mechanics) problems and quantum scale physics problems, and if you think you can figure it out and create a unified theory (search for "unified field theory") that bridges this gap you'll probably become the richest man (or woman) on the planet.
The slit experiment is ron
>>21719729Light, as you put it, is the mechanism through which the observation is made possible. It isn't the observer itself.
>>21719865Seriously. I can't believe how physicists are able to just do away with the most elemental laws of logic. If your framework violates the law of non-contradiction, something is obviously VERY wrong.>inb4 instrumentalism dooodFuck off, obscurantist bugman.
>>21723101>He ain't made of lightTo everyone else you are, eliminate your ego and only light remains.
>>21718875The schrödinger thought experiment isn't easy to understand so just ignore it. However, subatomic particles do have that property. A subatomic particle can be in multiple places at the same time untill they're observed. Their location is pure probably. It doesn't "exist" the way we experience reality untill observed. I've been to the quantum computing lab in Waterloo Ontario, not understanding an idea isnt proof that the idea doesn't exist. It only means you, the individual, don't understand it. It's completely irrelevant to humanities overall pursuit of knowledge and understanding.
>>21719865the problem with quantum calculation is that at macro or micro scale those stats start to compared to normal logic enche the term quantum to refer to a separate set of physicwich by any mean is no less confusing and makes little to know sense because from our outside it might as well be magic
>>21719028My man, opening the box to see if the cat is alive or dead effectively ruins the experiment if I remember correctly, that’s how the cat is neither alive nor dead because you can’t prove whether it is or not
Several of you faggots need to study the Delayed Choice Quantum Eraser experiments. This photon exchange interfering with the wave function horseshit needs to stop.
>>21720779If there is a 50% chance for each event then clearly factors such as where the cat was previously, or acts are part of the probability, you also have to remember that probability is not certain and is always experimental, meaning that there is no way of knowing the probability In the first place the only certainty to this is that any number of different outcomes could occur without knowing which all of them are.
>>21726721The cat in the box is not a real experiment. Nobody ever put a cat in a box with a vial of poison and killed it then sat and pondered whether the cat was dead or alive. The whole thing is a joke basically, a purposefully stupid parody of quantum physics. The idea that the cat is dead AND alive is meant to poke fun at the idea of wave-particle duality. The cat can't be both dead AND alive, just like very tiny things can't behave like waves AND particles. Except they can, and many experiments back up the belief that it really does happen.
>>21723153Seconded, they’re 99 percent wrong and one percent observations
>>21719551>laws of the universe are pretty mundane and small.Dellusional and retarded perspective if true.
>>21718875Fucking retards. Does literally nobody understand the schrodinger cat? It has nothing to do with an uncertainty principle, it is a thought experiment to explain probability in relation to radioactive particles
>>21718913That doesn't mean the cat is literally alive and dead at the same time.
>>21728801Why did he have to use a cat as an example then? It's a very bad comparison.
>>21728801Even though you're right, every word you used to explain the concept isn't relevant to an average person's vocabulary. So you just come off sounding like Rick
>>21718927I feel like this is something George Clooney would say.
>>21726740This. DCQE experiment kind of suggests a block universe interpretation if time along with many worlds and the principle of superposition, all at once. These guys can't even grasp the double slit experiment or understand that it demonstrates a self interaction across different density states.
>>21720779berserk thread now? lets do it
>>21718875well which is it then? is the cat alive or dead?
>>21718875I think scientists are teeing up experiments to see if they can incude bacteria or single celled organisms to a state of superposition next. Obviously ones that can be thawed
>>21718875>Imagine a cat locked up in a room of steel together with the following hellish machine (which has to be secured from direct attack by the cat): A tiny amount of radioactive material is placed inside a Geiger counter, so tiny that during one hour perhaps one of its atoms decays, but equally likely none. If it does decay then the counter is triggered and activates, via a relais, a little hammer which breaks a container of prussic acid. After this system has been left alone for one hour, one can say that the cat is still alive provided no atom has decayed in the mean time. The first decay of an atom would have poisoned the cat. In terms of the ψ−function of the entire system this is expressed as a mixture of a living and a dead cat. Typical about these cases is that an originally atomic uncertainty has been transformed into a coarse-grained uncertainty, which can then be decided by direct observation. This prevents us from considering a smeared-out model naively as an image of the real world. This does not represent anything vague or contradictory in itself. It is the difference between a blurred or poorly focussed photograph and a photograph of clouds and wafts of mist. -The Present Status of Quantum Mechanics By E. Schrödinger (1935)
>>21726857Probability means nothing when everything is cause and effect. Break the vile of (insert toxic substance) and it will eventually kill the cat. Or maybe it won't. Maybe the cat is really fat and the reaction didn't have enough potential to kill the cat. Like I said, it's a thought experiment with no basis in reality. >>21726866>The cat can't be both dead AND alive, just like very tiny things can't behave like waves AND particles. Except they can, and many experiments back up the belief that it really does happen.Swing and a miss.
>>21718918you are fucking stupid
>>21718913This guy gets it.
>>21719034also it was a way to explain that quantum mechanic was thought of in a stupid way. Of course the cat can't be dead AND alive, that's the point. The scientist who said that was tacking the piss out of other scientist.
>>21718875>picNobody EVER accounts for the worldline where the cat begins to understand its predicament and uses its remaining eight lives to ascend to superintelligence and create a singularity inside the box.
ITT: Anti-quantum physics shills clearly directed to discourage research into the myriad of topics on quantum interaction, because it brings the layman closer to realizing just how malleable reality is. Who hired you guys?
>>21734500I think the point of the thought experiment was more to describe a hypothetical scenario, in which quantum particles in a state of superposition can temporarily hold a larger system in a corresponding state of flux, or superposition.
>>21734611Just call yourself a scientist and then reality becomes malleable, because now you can say anything and the masses who have no idea what you are talking about will believe you.Quantum mechanics can be criticized.
>>21734653Pick up a textbook. I bet you think the earth is flat too.
>>21734666No I don'tI actually am studying quantum mechanics moderately, but I know most educated people have no creativity and will just regurgitate Mcfactoids without understanding itMaybe some assumptions made by scientist are wrong or fabricated, maybe we don't have the truth yet, maybe that's why the world is an unfinished puzzle that we don't understand yetYou know, scientists used to say the earth was flat
>>21719551My understanding of laws of the universe are pretty mundane and small. When I go beyond their boundaries nothing makes any sense. I'm in a bubble of understanding that is loosely held together. Other people are discovering what inhabits the infinite* Fixed that for you
>>21718920and just like that he was gone
Is it just me or did schordingerz cat used to be a lot more in depth and mind boggling and actually have some good points. Every video I look up is “you don’t know therefore it’s both” which is so fucking lame I can’t even begin to imagine how this got popular
>>21737632Some normieturds that watched too much big bang theory shared it on faceberg from "i fucking love science" to feel like they are smart because le quantum physics thought experiment BAZINGA!
>>21721141Umm no it’s not that they can’t grasp I it it’s that the experiment is moronic and completely overcomplicated for what it’s tryinng to describe so people read more inro it
>>21719028>You aren't both dead and alive just because someone doesn't see you.Or are you? O.OTo be honest here, i think attention = survival.
Most of you dipshits who are defending this experiment have no clue how quantum mechanics actually work. The Particals do not react to being observed they are affected by being measured (supposedly) who even knows how it works exactly. Point is this experiment has nothing to do with quantum mechanics and nothing to do with reality. Prove me wrong
>>21734691>I actually am studying quantum mechanics moderatelyWho isn't nowadays though.Ironically the majority is still spewing such nonsense as ''consciousness has nothing to do with it'' when if you look at all the interpretations of quantum mechanics and actually do some of the experiments for yourself (such as the quantum card experiment using a variation of the copenhagen interpretation) you will see for yourself that this is actually a sort of simulation/holographic universe we are living in.
>>21737632Yeah, schrodingers cat is about many worlds theory not just about simple observation lol. It even says so on the wiki yet 50% of this thread is like ''hurr durr the cat can't be both dead or alive''.It's talking about branches of reality and i think the wave function collapse by opening the box and observing the state.
>>21737682>The Particals do not react to being observed This is where Neil Degrasse Tyson would disagree with you there. And we all know how much we have to listen to NDT.The particles are influenced by being observed/being measured because you need light to observe a particle and the light itself alters the state so yes observation DOES interact with the particle because there is no way to observe a particle without altering it. >Most of you dipshits have no clue how quantum mechanics actually work>>''who even knows how it works exactly''Fucking kek.
>>21718875it’s a zombie you uncultured swine
>>21737694Buddy I said how it supposedly works, as in how the scientific community views it, also to humble myself and to not be a know it all I said who even know how it works because that’s a fact, nobody does. And your eyes do not create photons they observe photons that were already there so your viewing of it wouldn’t effect it. Do you have any issues with these points?
>>21737719I have issue with most of what you just said but that doesn't mean i'm going to waste my time enlightening some troll.