A Twist on Schrödinger's Cat Paradox

Re:A Twist on Schrödinger's Cat Paradox by millstone on Monday August 17, 2020 @04:07PM (#24191406)

That's just not what traditional QM says. Traditional QM separates quantum systems (microscopic) from measurements devices (macroscopic). A measurement occurs when the measurement device interacts with the quantum system. You do QM by predicting the results of these measurements. Consciousness does not enter into it.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:A Twist on Schrödinger's Cat Paradox by TheOtherHobbes on Monday August 17, 2020 @05:12PM (#24192165)

So why doesn't a measurement and/or decoherence occur when double slits or a half-silvered mirror interact with a passing particle? Are they not macroscopic objects which interact with the quantum information?

Perhaps it's only a "measurement" if the (alleged) particle has nowhere else to go after the interaction. But how does the (alleged) particle know which macroscopic interactions are terminal and should be counted as "measurements" and which are part of the rest of the experiment?

There is no answer to this in QM. You can calculate the probabilities and you will get predictable answers, but there are still >20 interpretations of what is really happening, and they all disagree with each other in important ways.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:A Twist on Schrödinger's Cat Paradox by BadThink6655321 on Monday August 17, 2020 @05:05PM (#24192087)

Until you get information from the measurement, it didn’t happen.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:A Twist on Schrödinger's Cat Paradox by rbanffy on Monday August 17, 2020 @05:23PM (#24192318)

Can it be considered as until it causally affects something else (the observer), its state is not defined? Isn't it a causal relation that collapses the superposition?

[ Parent | on HN ]