Surely you have heard more than once that there is such a phenomenon as “Schrödinger’s Cat”. But if you are not a physicist, then most likely you have only a vague idea of what kind of cat this is and why it is needed.
« Shroedinger `s cat“- this is the name of the famous thought experiment of the famous Austrian theoretical physicist Erwin Schrödinger, who is also a Nobel Prize laureate. With the help of this fictitious experiment, the scientist wanted to show the incompleteness of quantum mechanics in the transition from subatomic systems to macroscopic systems.
This article attempts to explain in simple words the essence of Schrödinger's theory about the cat and quantum mechanics, so that it is accessible to a person who does not have a higher technical education. The article will also present various interpretations of the experiment, including those from the TV series “The Big Bang Theory.”
Description of the experiment
Erwin Schrödinger's original article was published in 1935. In it, the experiment was described using or even personifying:
You can also construct cases in which there is quite a burlesque. Let some cat be locked in a steel chamber with the following diabolical machine (which should be regardless of the cat's intervention): inside a Geiger counter there is a tiny amount of radioactive substance, so small that only one atom can decay in an hour, but with the same probability may not disintegrate; if this happens, the reading tube is discharged and the relay is activated, releasing the hammer, which breaks the flask with hydrocyanic acid.
If we leave this entire system to itself for an hour, then we can say that the cat will be alive after this time, as long as the atom does not disintegrate. The very first disintegration of the atom would poison the cat. The psi-function of the system as a whole will express this by mixing or smearing a living and a dead cat (pardon the expression) in equal parts. It is typical in such cases that the uncertainty initially limited atomic world, is converted into macroscopic uncertainty, which can be eliminated by direct observation. This prevents us from naively accepting the “blur model” as reflecting reality. This in itself does not mean anything unclear or contradictory. There's a difference between a blurry or out-of-focus photo and a photo of clouds or fog.
In other words:
- There is a box and a cat. The box contains a mechanism containing a radioactive atomic nucleus and a container of poisonous gas. The experimental parameters were selected so that the probability of nuclear decay in 1 hour is 50%. If the nucleus disintegrates, a container of gas opens and the cat dies. If the nucleus does not decay, the cat remains alive and well.
- We close the cat in a box, wait an hour and ask the question: is the cat alive or dead?
- Quantum mechanics seems to tell us that the atomic nucleus (and therefore the cat) is in all possible states simultaneously (see quantum superposition). Before we open the box, the cat-core system is in the state “the nucleus has decayed, the cat is dead” with a probability of 50% and in the state “the nucleus has not decayed, the cat is alive” with a probability of 50%. It turns out that the cat sitting in the box is both alive and dead at the same time.
- According to the modern Copenhagen interpretation, the cat is alive/dead without any intermediate states. And the choice of the decay state of the nucleus occurs not at the moment of opening the box, but even when the nucleus enters the detector. Because the reduction of the wave function of the “cat-detector-nucleus” system is not associated with the human observer of the box, but is associated with the detector-observer of the nucleus.
Explanation in simple words
According to quantum mechanics, if the nucleus of an atom is not observed, then its state is described by a mixture of two states - a decayed nucleus and an undecayed nucleus, therefore, a cat sitting in a box and personifying the nucleus of an atom is both alive and dead at the same time. If the box is opened, then the experimenter can see only one specific state - “the nucleus has decayed, the cat is dead” or “the nucleus has not decayed, the cat is alive.”
The essence human language: Schrödinger's experiment showed that, from the point of view of quantum mechanics, the cat is both alive and dead, which cannot be. Therefore, quantum mechanics has significant flaws.
The question is: when does a system cease to exist as a mixture of two states and choose one specific one? The purpose of the experiment is to show that quantum mechanics is incomplete without some rules that indicate under what conditions the wave function collapses, and the cat either becomes dead or remains alive, but ceases to be a mixture of both. Since it is clear that a cat must be either alive or dead (there is no state intermediate between life and death), then this will be similar for atomic nucleus. It must be either decayed or undecayed (Wikipedia).
Video from The Big Bang Theory
Another more recent interpretation of Schrödinger's thought experiment is a story that Sheldon Cooper, the hero of the Big Bang Theory, told his less educated neighbor Penny. The point of Sheldon's story is that the concept of Schrödinger's cat can be applied to human relationships. In order to understand what is happening between a man and a woman, what kind of relationship is between them: good or bad, you just need to open the box. Until then, the relationship is both good and bad.
Below is a video clip of this Big Bang Theory exchange between Sheldon and Penia.
Did the cat remain alive as a result of the experiment?
For those who didn’t read the article carefully, but are still worried about the cat, good news: don’t worry, according to our data, as a result of a thought experiment by a crazy Austrian physicist
NO CAT WAS HURT
“Schrödinger’s Cat” is the name of an entertaining thought experiment, staged, as you probably already guessed, by Schrödinger, or rather, Nobel laureate in physics, by the Austrian scientist Erwin Rudolf Joseph Alexander Schrödinger. "Wikipedia" defines the experiment as follows: "A cat is placed in a closed box. The box contains a mechanism containing a radioactive nucleus and a container with poisonous gas. The parameters of the experiment are selected so that the probability that the nucleus will decay in 1 hour, is 50%. If the nucleus decays, it activates the mechanism - the container with gas opens, and the cat dies.
According to quantum mechanics, if no observation is made of the nucleus, then its state is described by a superposition (mixing) of two states - a decayed nucleus and an undecayed nucleus, therefore, a cat sitting in a box is both alive and dead at the same time. If the box is opened, then the experimenter must see only one specific state: “the nucleus has decayed, the cat is dead,” or “the nucleus has not decayed, the cat is alive.”
It turns out that at the end we have a living or dead cat, but potentially, the cat is both alive and dead at the same time. Thus, Schrödinger tried to prove the limitations of quantum mechanics, without applying certain rules to it.
Copenhagen interpretation quantum physics- and in particular this experiment - indicates that the cat acquires the properties of one of the potential phases (alive-dead) only after the observer intervenes in the process.
That is, when a particular Schrödinger opens the box, he one hundred percent certainty You'll have to cut the sausages or call the vet. The cat will definitely be alive or suddenly dead. But as long as there is no observer in the process - a specific person who has undoubted advantages in the form of vision, and, at a minimum, clear consciousness - the cat will be in limbo “between heaven and earth.”
The ancient parable about a cat who walks by itself takes on new shades in this context. Undoubtedly, Schrödinger's cat is not the most prosperous creature in the Universe. Let us wish the cat a successful outcome for him and turn to another an entertaining task from the mysterious and sometimes merciless world of quantum mechanics.
It sounds like this: “What sound does a tree falling in the forest make if there is no person nearby who can perceive this sound?” Here, in contrast to the black and white fate of the unhappy/happy cat, we are faced with a multi-colored palette of speculation: there is no sound/there is sound, what is it like, if it exists, and if it is not there, then why? This question cannot be answered for a very simple reason - the impossibility of carrying out the experiment. After all, any experiment implies the presence of an observer capable of perceiving and drawing conclusions.
The famous Argentine writer Julio Cartazar, a prominent representative of "magical realism", has short story about how office furniture, left without an observer, moves around the office, as if using free time in order to stretch the “stiff” limbs.
That is, it is impossible to guess what happens to the objects of reality around us in our absence. And if it cannot be perceived, then it does not exist. As soon as we leave a room, all its contents, along with the room itself, cease to exist or, more precisely, continue to exist only in potential.
At the same time, there is a fire or flood, theft of equipment or uninvited guests. Moreover, we also exist in it, in different potential states. One I walks around the room and whistles a stupid melody, another I looks sadly at the window, the third talks to my wife on the phone. Even ours lives in it sudden death or good news in the form of an unexpected phone call.
Imagine for a moment all the possibilities hidden behind the door. Now imagine that our entire world is just a collection of such unrealized potentials. It's funny, isn't it?
However, a logical question arises here: so what? Yes, it’s funny, yes, it’s interesting, but what, in essence, does this change? Science is modestly silent about this. For quantum physics, such knowledge opens up new paths in understanding the Universe and its mechanisms, but for us, people far from big scientific discoveries, such information seems to be of no use.
How can this be of no use!? After all, if I, a mortal, exist in this world, then I, an immortal, exist in another world! If my life consists of a streak of failures and disappointments, then somewhere I exist - successful and happy? In fact, there is nothing outside our sensations, just as there is no room until we enter it. Our organs of perception only deceive us, drawing in our brain a picture of the world “surrounding” us. What actually lies outside of us still remains a secret behind seven seals.
Schrödinger's cat is the most mysterious of all the cats, cats, cats, cats that humanity adores so much. Viral cat videos spread across the World Wide Web with millions of daily views, and images of cute kittens on advertising billboards can make us buy any product. The field of popularizing science also has its own mustachioed and striped heroes. More precisely, one is Schrödinger's cat. Surely you have heard about it, even if you are not involved in quantum mechanics. So why has the famous cat haunted physicists and lyricists for almost a hundred years, and also become one of the most curious objects of modern mass culture?
Schrödinger's cat as a metaphor
As paradoxical as it may sound, Austrian theoretical physicist and Nobel Prize winner Erwin Schrödinger is the “father” of the most mysterious cat, and not the owner. After all Shroedinger `s cat is a thought experiment, a theoretical paradox, and a truly amazing metaphor for describing quantum superposition.
Was there a cat?
The question “Did Schrödinger have a cat?” still remains open. Although, according to a number of sources, in one of the early editions PhysicsToday there is a photograph of the scientist with his pet cat Milton. On the other hand, in original text article in 1935, where Erwin Schrödinger described his hypothetical experiment, and it is not a cat that is listed at all, but a cat (die Katze). Why did the physicist choose a feline representative as the main character of his concept? How did the cat turn into a cat? These questions seem destined to remain rhetorical.
Schrödinger's cat is dead with a 50% chance
Designua / shutterstock.comHowever, if the source of inspiration for the researcher was his personal pet, then, apparently, the reason for this was a vase broken by a cat or damaged wallpaper. Because the main thing that Schrödinger’s cat does during the experiment is to be locked in a steel box and... die. True, with a probability of 50%. More precisely, in addition to the poor animal, a special mechanism containing a radioactive core and a container with poisonous gas is placed inside the box. If the nucleus disintegrates, the mechanism is triggered, and the cat dies from the released gas. If it doesn't work, it lives. But only the observer who opens the box can know his fate. Until then, the cat is both alive and dead.
Without a cat, quantum mechanics is not the same
This whole situation, paradoxical at first glance, clearly illustrates one of the provisions of quantum mechanics. According to him, the atomic nucleus is simultaneously in all possible states: decay and non-decay. If no observation is made of the atom, then its state is described by a mixture of these two characteristics. Therefore, the cat, read - the nucleus of an atom, is both alive and dead. And this is simply impossible. This means that quantum mechanics lacks some rules that determine the conditions under which the fate of the cat is clearly clear.
Schrödingr's cat: varieties
It is not surprising that the meaning of what is happening with the mythical cat in a steel box has several interpretations.
- Copenhagen variety
There is the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics, the authors of which are Niels Bohr and Werner Heisenberg. According to it, the cat remains in both states, regardless of the observer. After all, the decisive moment occurs not when the drawer opens, but when the mechanism is triggered. That is, the animal has long since died from the gas, but the box is still locked. In other words, in the Copenhagen interpretation there is no “dead-alive” state, because it is determined by a detector that reacts to the decay of the nucleus.
- Everett variety
There is also a many-worlds interpretation, or the Everett interpretation. She interprets the experience with Schrödinger's cat as two separate existing world, splitting into which occurs at the moment when the box is opened. In one universe the cat is alive and well, in another he did not survive the experiment.
- "quantum suicide"
One way or another, the poor cat Schrödinger was “tormented” by many physicists. Some, for example, proposed considering the situation with the cat from the point of view of the animal itself - after all, he knows better than all the physicists in the world whether he is dead or alive. Really, you can't argue with that. This approach is called “quantum suicide” and hypothetically allows you to check which of these interpretations is correct.
Everyone can breed their own variety
If you look at modern physical science, you can say with confidence that on the pages of research, Schrödinger’s long-suffering cat is more alive than anyone else alive. From time to time, scientists offer their solutions to this well-known paradox, and also develop the concept in the framework of very interesting developments.
- "second box"
For example, last year, researchers at Yale University "gave" Schrödinger's cat a second box for his deadly hide and seek. Based on this approach, scientists tried to simulate the system necessary for the operation of a quantum computer. After all, as you know, one of the main difficulties in creating this type of machine is the need to correct errors. And, as it turns out, using Schrödinger’s cats is a promising way to manage excess quantum information.
- "micro cat"
And just a couple of weeks ago, an international team of scientists, led by Russian experts in the field of quantum optics, managed to “breed” microscopic Schrödinger cats in order to advance in the search for the boundary between the quantum and classical worlds. This is how Schrödinger’s cat helps physicists develop quantum communication technologies and cryptography.
Schrödinger's cat is a pop culture star
Africa Studio / shutterstock.com
If the cat cannot escape from his ill-fated box, then he managed to get out of the boundaries of scientific concepts and pages of research. And how!
The character of a mysterious cat with a difficult fate appears with enviable consistency in works of popular culture. Thus, Schrödinger's cat appears in the books of Terry Pratchett, Fredrik Pohl, Douglas Adams and other world famous writers. Of course, there was a mention of the cat in popular television projects such as “The Big Bang Theory” and “Doctor Who.” Not to mention that the image of Schrödinger's cat is constantly found in video games and song lyrics. And the Internet portal ThinkGeek has already made a fortune selling T-shirts with the inscription on one side: “Schrodinger's Cat is Alive”, and on the other - “Schrodinger's Cat is Dead.”
Cats do it better
Agree, you can observe an amazing thing: the most famous scientific cat is just a visualized model for testing a hypothesis. However, the participation of the tailed pet in it gave the experiment a significant amount of poetry and charm. Or maybe it’s just that cats do everything better? Quite possible.
And remember: as a result of Schrödinger’s experiment, not a single cat was harmed.
If you find an error, please highlight a piece of text and click Ctrl+Enter.
Perhaps some of you have heard the phrase “Schrödinger’s cat.” However, for most people this name means nothing.
If you consider yourself a thinking subject, and even claim to be an intellectual, then you should definitely find out what Schrödinger’s cat is and why he became famous in.
Shroedinger `s cat is a thought experiment proposed by the Austrian theoretical physicist Erwin Schrödinger. This talented scientist received his award in 1933. Nobel Prize in physics.
Through his famous experiment, he wanted to show the incompleteness of quantum mechanics in the transition from subatomic to macroscopic systems.
Erwin Schrödinger tried to explain his theory using the original example of a cat. He wanted to make it as simple as possible so that his idea could be understood by anyone.
Whether he succeeded or not, you will find out by reading the article to the end.
The essence of the Schrödinger's Cat experiment
Suppose a certain cat is locked in a steel chamber with such an infernal machine (which must be protected from direct intervention by the cat): inside the Geiger counter there is such a tiny amount of radioactive material that only one atom can decay within an hour, but with the same probability may not disintegrate; if this happens, the reading tube is discharged and the relay is activated, releasing the hammer, which breaks the flask with hydrocyanic acid.
If we leave this entire system to itself for an hour, then we can say that the cat will be alive after this time, as long as the atom does not disintegrate.
The very first disintegration of the atom would poison the cat. The psi-function of the system as a whole will express this by mixing or smearing a living and a dead cat (pardon the expression) in equal parts.
What is typical in such cases is that uncertainty originally limited to the atomic world is transformed into macroscopic uncertainty, which can be eliminated by direct observation.
This prevents us from naively accepting the “blur model” as reflecting reality. This in itself does not mean anything unclear or contradictory.
There's a difference between a blurry or out-of-focus photo and a photo of clouds or fog.
In other words, we have a box and a cat. The box contains a device with a radioactive atomic nucleus and a container of poisonous gas.
During the experiment, the probability of decay or non-decay of the nucleus is equal to 50%. Therefore, if it decays, the animal will die, and if the nucleus does not decay, Schrödinger’s cat will remain alive.
We lock the cat in a box and wait for an hour, reflecting on the frailty of life.
According to the laws of quantum mechanics, the nucleus (and, consequently, the cat itself) can simultaneously be in all possible states (see quantum superposition).
Until the moment the box is opened, the “cat-core” system assumes two possible outcomes of events: “core decay - the cat is dead” with a probability of 50%, and “nucleus decay did not happen - the cat is alive” with the same degree of probability.
It turns out that Schrödinger's cat, sitting inside the box, is both alive and dead at the same time.
The interpretation of the Copenhagen interpretation says that in any case, the cat is alive and dead at the same time. The choice of nuclear decay occurs not when we open the box, but also when the nucleus hits the detector.
This is due to the fact that the reduction of the wave function of the “cat-detector-core” system is in no way interconnected with the person observing from the outside. It is directly connected to the detector-observer of the atomic nucleus.
Schrödinger's cat in simple words
According to the laws of quantum mechanics, if there is no observation of the atomic nucleus, it can be dual: that is, decay will either happen or not.
It follows from this that the cat, which is in the box and represents the nucleus, can be both alive and dead at the same time.
But the moment the observer decides to open the box, he will be able to see only one of 2 possible states.
But now a logical question arises: when exactly does the system cease to exist in a dual form?
Thanks to this experience, Schrödinger argued that quantum mechanics is incomplete without certain rules explaining when the wave function collapses.
Considering the fact that Schrödinger's cat sooner or later must become either alive or dead, then this will be similar for the atomic nucleus: atomic decay will either happen or not.
The essence of experience in human language
Schrödinger, using the example of a cat, wanted to show that according to quantum mechanics, an animal will be both alive and dead at the same time. This is, in fact, impossible, from which the conclusion is drawn that quantum mechanics today has significant flaws.
Video from "The Big Bang Theory"
The character of the series Sheldon Cooper tried to explain to his “close-minded” friend the essence of the Schrödinger’s Cat experiment. To do this, he used the example of the relationship between a man and a woman.
To find out what kind of relationship they have, you just need to open the box. In the meantime, it will be closed, their relationship can be both positive and negative at the same time.
Did Schrödinger's cat survive the experience?
If any of our readers are worried about the cat, then you should calm down. During the experiment, none of them died, and Schrödinger himself called his experiment mental, that is, one that is carried out exclusively in the mind.
We hope you understand the essence of the Schrödinger's Cat experiment. If you have any questions, you can ask them in the comments. And, of course, share this article on social networks.
If you like it, subscribe to the site IinterestingFakty.org any in a convenient way. It's always interesting with us!
Did you like the post? Press any button:
Recently published on the well-known scientific portal "PostScience" is an author's article by Emil Akhmedov about the reasons for the emergence of the famous paradox, as well as what it is not.
Physicist Emil Akhmedov on probabilistic interpretation, closed quantum systems and the formulation of the paradox.
In my opinion, the most difficult part of quantum mechanics, psychologically, philosophically, and in many other respects, is its probabilistic interpretation. Many people have argued with the probabilistic interpretation. For example, Einstein, along with Podolsky and Rosen, came up with a paradox that refutes the probabilistic interpretation.
In addition to them, Schrödinger also argued with the probabilistic interpretation of quantum mechanics. As a logical contradiction to the probabilistic interpretation of quantum mechanics, Schrödinger came up with the so-called Schrödinger's cat paradox. It can be formulated in different ways, for example: let's say you have a box in which a cat is sitting, and a cylinder of lethal gas is connected to this box. Some kind of device is connected to the switch of this cylinder, which allows or does not let in the deadly gas, which works as follows: there is a polarizing glass, and if the passing photon is of the required polarization, then the cylinder turns on, the gas flows to the cat; if the photon is of the wrong polarization, then the cylinder does not turn on, the key does not turn on, the cylinder does not let gas into the cat.
Let's say the photon is circularly polarized, and the device responds to linear polarization. This may not be clear, but it is not very important. With some probability the photon will be polarized in one way, with some probability - in another. Schrödinger said: the situation turns out to be that at some point, until we open the lid and see whether the cat is dead or alive (and the system is closed), the cat will be alive with some probability and will be dead with some probability. Maybe I'm formulating the paradox carelessly, but the end result is a strange situation: the cat is neither alive nor dead. This is how the paradox is formulated.
In my opinion, this paradox has a completely clear and precise explanation. Perhaps this is my personal point of view, but I will try to explain. The main property of quantum mechanics is the following: if we describe a closed system, then quantum mechanics is nothing more than wave mechanics, wave mechanics. This means that it is described by differential equations whose solutions are waves. Where there are waves and differential equations, there are matrices and so on. These are two equivalent descriptions: matrix description and wave description. The matrix description belongs to Heisenberg, the wave description to Schrödinger, but they describe the same situation.
The following is important: while the system is closed, it is described by a wave equation, and what happens to this wave is described by some kind of wave equation. The entire probabilistic interpretation of quantum mechanics arises after the system is opened - it is influenced from the outside by some large classical, that is, non-quantum, object. At the moment of impact, it ceases to be described by this wave equation. The so-called wave function reduction and probabilistic interpretation arise. Until the moment of opening, the system evolves in accordance with the wave equation.
Now we need to make a few comments about how a large classical system differs from a small quantum one. Generally speaking, even a large classical system can be described using a wave equation, although this description is usually difficult to provide, and in reality it is completely unnecessary. These systems differ mathematically in their actions. The so-called object exists in quantum mechanics, in field theory. For a classical large system the action is huge, but for a quantum small system the action is small. Moreover, the gradient of this action - the rate of change of this action in time and space - is huge for a large classical system, and small for a small quantum one. This is the main difference between the two systems. Due to the fact that the action is very large for a classical system, it is more convenient to describe it not by some wave equations, but simply classical laws like Newton's law and so on. For example, for this reason, the Moon rotates around the Earth not like an electron around the nucleus of an atom, but along a certain, clearly defined orbit, along a classical orbit, trajectory. While the electron, being a small quantum system, moves like a standing wave inside an atom around the nucleus, its motion is described by a standing wave, and this is the difference between the two situations.
A measurement in quantum mechanics is when you influence a small quantum system with a large classical system. After this, the wave function is reduced. In my opinion, the presence of a balloon or a cat in the Schrödinger paradox is the same as the presence of a large classical system that measures the polarization of a photon. Accordingly, the measurement occurs not at the moment when we open the lid of the box and see whether the cat is alive or dead, but at the moment when the photon interacts with the polarizing glass. Thus, at this moment the photon wave function is reduced, the balloon finds itself in a very specific state: either it opens or it does not open, and the cat dies or does not die. All. There are no “probability cats” that he is with some probability alive, with some probability he is dead. When I said that Schrödinger's cat paradox has many different formulations, I only said that there are many different ways come up with a device that kills or leaves a cat alive. In essence, the formulation of the paradox does not change.
I have heard of other attempts to explain this paradox using the plurality of worlds and so on. In my opinion, all these explanations do not stand up to criticism. What I explained in words during this video can be put into mathematical form and the truth of this statement can be verified. I emphasize once again that, in my opinion, the measurement and reduction of the wave function of a small quantum system occurs at the moment of interaction with a large classical system. Such a large classical system is a cat along with a device that kills it, and not a person who opens a box with a cat and sees whether the cat is alive or not. That is, the measurement occurs at the moment of interaction of this system with a quantum particle, and not at the moment of checking the cat. Such paradoxes, in my opinion, find explanations from the application of theories and common sense.
The essence of the experiment itself
Schrödinger's original paper described the experiment as follows:
You can also construct cases in which there is quite a burlesque. A certain cat is locked in a steel chamber with the following infernal machine (which must be protected from the cat's direct intervention): inside a Geiger counter there is a tiny amount of radioactive substance, so small that only one atom can decay in an hour, but with the same probability that and not fall apart; if this happens, the reading tube is discharged and the relay is activated, releasing the hammer, which breaks the flask with hydrocyanic acid. If we leave this entire system to itself for an hour, then we can say that the cat will be alive after this time, as long as the atom does not disintegrate. The very first disintegration of the atom would poison the cat. The psi-function of the system as a whole will express this by mixing or smearing a living and a dead cat (pardon the expression) in equal parts. What is typical in such cases is that uncertainty originally limited to the atomic world is transformed into macroscopic uncertainty, which can be eliminated by direct observation. This prevents us from naively accepting the “blur model” as reflecting reality. This in itself does not mean anything unclear or contradictory. There's a difference between a blurry or out-of-focus photo and a photo of clouds or fog. According to quantum mechanics, if no observation is made of the nucleus, then its state is described by a superposition (mixing) of two states - a decayed nucleus and an undecayed nucleus, therefore, a cat sitting in a box is both alive and dead at the same time. If the box is opened, then the experimenter can see only one specific state - “the nucleus has decayed, the cat is dead” or “the nucleus has not decayed, the cat is alive.” The question is: when does a system cease to exist as a mixture of two states and choose one specific one? The purpose of the experiment is to show that quantum mechanics is incomplete without some rules that indicate under what conditions the wave function collapses, and the cat either becomes dead or remains alive, but ceases to be a mixture of both.
Since it is clear that a cat must be either alive or dead (there is no state combining life and death), this will be similar for the atomic nucleus. It must be either decayed or undecayed.
The original article was published in 1935. The purpose of the article was to discuss the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen paradox (EPR), published by Einstein, Podolsky and Rosen earlier that year
Loading...