# Physicists: Am I saying the right thing about Schroedinger's Cat? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [March 19, 2010, 10:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/physicists-am-i-saying-the-right-thing-about-schroedingers-cat/533075 "2010-03-19T22:50:02Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Frylock](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/ce7236/32.png) [@Frylock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frylock)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2010, 10:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/physicists-am-i-saying-the-right-thing-about-schroedingers-cat/533075/1 "2010-03-19T22:50:02Z")
Here’s how I’d have answered a particular kind of true/false test about Schroedinger’s Cat. 1. The cat is alive. **False** 2. The cat is dead. **False** 3. The cat is not alive. **True** 4. The cat is not dead. **True**. My reasoning is that being in a superposition of states is different from being in either of the states themselves, and since the cat is in a superposition of the alive and dead states, the status of the cat is that it is not alive, and is not dead. Since it’s not alive or dead, 1 and 2 are false. Since it’s not alive, 3 is true. Since it’s not dead, 4 is true. This question is prompted by the fact that on the radio today I heard an interview with a physicist in which the physicist said that the cat is _both_ alive _and_ not alive. In other words, this physicist, apparently, would answer questions one and three above both with “true.” (I don’t know what he would say about 2 and 4.) I thought I knew the right thing to say about superpositions, but was I wrong? (Note: Actually what the physicist said was that if a person is in a room, and is not “strongly coupled with his environment,” then if the person isn’t being observed, the person is both there and not there at the same time. I translated this into Schroedinger’s Cat talk for familiarity’s sake.) ---
**Author:** ![Snarky\_Kong](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a183cd/32.png) [@Snarky\_Kong](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snarky_Kong)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2010, 12:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/physicists-am-i-saying-the-right-thing-about-schroedingers-cat/533075/2 "2010-03-20T00:35:29Z")
Not a physicist. Both alive and dead. ---
**Author:** ![kombatminipig](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/b5ac83/32.png) [@kombatminipig](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kombatminipig)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2010, 12:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/physicists-am-i-saying-the-right-thing-about-schroedingers-cat/533075/3 "2010-03-20T00:47:36Z")
Not a physicist. I believe that Schrödinger’s point was that it was a binary choice. The absurdity of his cat being alive and dead at the same time was critique of the Copenhagen interpretation. ---
**Author:** ![Simplicio](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/c37758/32.png) [@Simplicio](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Simplicio)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2010, 12:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/physicists-am-i-saying-the-right-thing-about-schroedingers-cat/533075/4 "2010-03-20T00:49:54Z")
Am a physicists, but I don’t think its a factual question so much as a matter of opinion on how to interpret “superposition of states”. Personally I’d say any state thats part of the superposition is “true”, and any state that isn’t in it (or has a coefficent of zero) is “false”, just out of desire to make the concepts of true/false useful in the context of quantum states. But again, I don’t think there’s an “official” answer that most scientists would agree with. ---
**Author:** ![Dallas\_Jones](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dallas_jones/32/3277_2.png) [@Dallas\_Jones](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dallas_Jones)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2010, 1:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/physicists-am-i-saying-the-right-thing-about-schroedingers-cat/533075/5 "2010-03-20T01:34:25Z")
The cat is just fine until you decide to take a look at it. Really, just trust me, it’s fine. Dammit, you had to look, didn’t you? Oh, well. Curiousity killed the cat. ---
**Author:** ![GameHat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/ed655f/32.png) [@GameHat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GameHat)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2010, 1:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/physicists-am-i-saying-the-right-thing-about-schroedingers-cat/533075/6 "2010-03-20T01:34:25Z")
Not to mindfark you all too hard, but there was a slim but interesting piece on NPR today - [Quantum Physics Leaps Into The Visible World](http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=124820013) Basic gist of the story - researchers built a small (but macro sized) resonator that when supercooled, showed quantum mechanical behavior as opposed to just the plain ol’ Newtonian physics you expect a macro object to exhibit. I’ll try to look up the paper this weekend. So the cat CAN be alive and dead! 😃 ---
**Author:** ![KNO3](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ea5d25/32.png) [@KNO3](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/KNO3)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2010, 1:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/physicists-am-i-saying-the-right-thing-about-schroedingers-cat/533075/7 "2010-03-20T01:43:56Z")
Not for long. The cat is an observer. ---
**Author:** ![fuzzypickles](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/9d8465/32.png) [@fuzzypickles](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/fuzzypickles)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2010, 2:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/physicists-am-i-saying-the-right-thing-about-schroedingers-cat/533075/8 "2010-03-20T02:18:23Z")
> [@KNO3](#): > > Not for long. The cat is an observer. Only as long as the cat is alive. Once the cat is dead, it’s no longer an observer. Which means, the cat is no longer dead. So, it’s alive. Until it dies again. Therefore, it’s alive… Ow, my head! ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2010, 2:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/physicists-am-i-saying-the-right-thing-about-schroedingers-cat/533075/9 "2010-03-20T02:36:04Z")
It is obligatory to post this link. [http://www.phobe.com/s\_cat/s\_cat.html](http://www.phobe.com/s_cat/s_cat.html) Obligatory for 2 reasons: It is an interactive version of the silly experiment, and it links to Cecil’s Schroedinger’s cat epic poem. ---
**Author:** ![njtt](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/ecd19e/32.png) [@njtt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/njtt)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2010, 2:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/physicists-am-i-saying-the-right-thing-about-schroedingers-cat/533075/10 "2010-03-20T02:59:45Z")
> [@Frylock](#): > > Actually what the physicist said was that if a person is in a room, and is not “strongly coupled with his environment,” then if the person isn’t being observed, the person is both there and not there at the same time. I translated this into Schroedinger’s Cat talk for familiarity’s sake. Oh shit, I am alone here in my room and no-one is watching me! I guess the fact that I am posting this establishes the fact that I am here, but if I stop posting, is there a 50% probability that I might wink out of existence? Or is it that I would teleport to somewhere else? (Would my clothes teleport along with me?) :eek: Or are some physicists not so smart as they think? ---
**Author:** ![njtt](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/ecd19e/32.png) [@njtt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/njtt)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2010, 3:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/physicists-am-i-saying-the-right-thing-about-schroedingers-cat/533075/11 "2010-03-20T03:07:23Z")
> [@GameHat](#): > > Not to mindfark you all too hard, but there was a slim but interesting piece on NPR today - > > [Quantum Physics Leaps Into The Visible World](http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=124820013) > > Basic gist of the story - researchers built a small (but macro sized) resonator that when supercooled, showed quantum mechanical behavior as opposed to just the plain ol’ Newtonian physics you expect a macro object to exhibit. > > I’ll try to look up the paper this weekend. > > So the cat CAN be alive and dead! > > 😃 So they could see that the thing they made was sometimes there and sometimes not there? Or was sort of half-there? :dubious: Sorry if this is not a very well thought out post, but, for the reasons explained in the previous post, I need to keep posting, and I can’t really afford to stop to think about things, or I could be in serious danger. ---
**Author:** ![njtt](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/ecd19e/32.png) [@njtt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/njtt)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2010, 3:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/physicists-am-i-saying-the-right-thing-about-schroedingers-cat/533075/12 "2010-03-20T03:08:39Z")
. . ---
**Author:** ![LiveOnAPlane](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/3d9bf3/32.png) [@LiveOnAPlane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LiveOnAPlane)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2010, 4:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/physicists-am-i-saying-the-right-thing-about-schroedingers-cat/533075/13 "2010-03-20T04:12:44Z")
> [@njtt](#): > > . . Dammit, he’s done it again. Hey, would someone someone please observe **njtt** – quick like? ---
**Author:** ![pancakes3](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ba9def/32.png) [@pancakes3](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pancakes3)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2010, 5:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/physicists-am-i-saying-the-right-thing-about-schroedingers-cat/533075/14 "2010-03-20T05:11:35Z")
> [@njtt](#): > > Oh shit, I am alone here in my room and no-one is watching me! I guess the fact that I am posting this establishes the fact that I am here, but if I stop posting, is there a 50% probability that I might wink out of existence? Or is it that I would teleport to somewhere else? (Would my clothes teleport along with me?) :eek: > > Or are some physicists not so smart as they think? quantum rules apply only to quantum particles as for the OP, the superposition of 2 states really is saying you can’t know without observing, and there’s no way to observe without changing the situation. the endgame is a neatly convenient and thus-far true conclusion that you just simply cannot know. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2010, 6:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/physicists-am-i-saying-the-right-thing-about-schroedingers-cat/533075/15 "2010-03-20T06:54:06Z")
> [@](#): > > quantum rules apply only to quantum particles Of course, but everything in the Universe is a quantum particle. All you are is a very complicated bound state of a whole bunch of electrons and quarks. ---
**Author:** ![KNO3](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ea5d25/32.png) [@KNO3](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/KNO3)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2010, 7:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/physicists-am-i-saying-the-right-thing-about-schroedingers-cat/533075/16 "2010-03-20T07:14:09Z")
> [@fuzzypickles](#): > > Only as long as the cat is alive. Once the cat is dead, it’s no longer an observer. Which means, the cat is no longer dead. So, it’s alive. Until it dies again. Therefore, it’s alive… > > Ow, my head! I wonder if dead things counts as an observer? ---
**Author:** ![septimus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/septimus/32/410_2.png) [@septimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/septimus)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2010, 8:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/physicists-am-i-saying-the-right-thing-about-schroedingers-cat/533075/17 "2010-03-20T08:49:24Z")
> [@ghardester](#): > > The cat is just fine until you decide to take a look at it. Really, just trust me, it’s fine. > > Dammit, you had to look, didn’t you? > > Oh, well. Curiousity killed the cat. This comment somehow reminded me I was playing The Game, which I’ve now just lost. :smack: :mad: … or maybe there’s still an unobserved septimus somewhen who hasn’t lost The Game yet?? 😕 ---
**Author:** ![Frylock](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/ce7236/32.png) [@Frylock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frylock)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2010, 11:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/physicists-am-i-saying-the-right-thing-about-schroedingers-cat/533075/18 "2010-03-20T11:05:20Z")
> [@njtt](#): > > Oh shit, I am alone here in my room and no-one is watching me! I guess the fact that I am posting this establishes the fact that I am here, but if I stop posting, is there a 50% probability that I might wink out of existence? Or is it that I would teleport to somewhere else? (Would my clothes teleport along with me?) :eek: > > Or are some physicists not so smart as they think? Hey **njtt** , I assume you are strongly coupled with your environment. ---
**Author:** ![Frylock](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/ce7236/32.png) [@Frylock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frylock)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2010, 11:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/physicists-am-i-saying-the-right-thing-about-schroedingers-cat/533075/19 "2010-03-20T11:09:22Z")
> [@pancakes3](#): > > quantum rules apply only to quantum particles > > as for the OP, the superposition of 2 states really is saying you can’t know without observing, and there’s no way to observe without changing the situation. What the physics says is that these things _really are_ in a state of superposition. It’s not just that we can’t know which state they’re actually in–we know exactly what state they’re in, and that state is the state of superposition. Just went looking for cites and can’t find anything relevant in the brief time available to me, so sorry about that. ---
**Author:** ![ZenBeam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/3ab097/32.png) [@ZenBeam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ZenBeam)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2010, 12:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/physicists-am-i-saying-the-right-thing-about-schroedingers-cat/533075/20 "2010-03-20T12:00:39Z")
> [@pancakes3](#): > > quantum rules apply only to quantum particles. [Including macroscopic objects made from those particles](http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn18669-first-quantum-effects-seen-in-visible-object.html). For the OP, I’d say all four questions are most properly answered **False**. ETA: To give an analogy, suppose I’m going to flip a coin, but haven’t yet, and in your four questions, substitute **coin** for **cat** , **heads** for **alive** , and **tails** for **dead**. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/physicists-am-i-saying-the-right-thing-about-schroedingers-cat/533075.md?page=2)