Quantum Theory and The Many Worlds Theory

[cacian]

I know I have to study this to get to the bottom of it.
I do not like theories only practices but one has to brave if one has to discover things. It is better then reading an epic poem that does not make sense.
The word quantum from quantity quantifying means a rough measurement number either in weight distance or heights.
Quantum is what establishes that something exists?
Without a quantity something is apparently not.
According to this I quote:

Niels Bohr proposed the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum theory, which asserts that a particle is whatever it is measured to be (for example, a wave or a particle), but that it cannot be assumed to have specific properties, or even to exist, until it is measured.
Bohr was saying that objective reality does not exist. This translates to a principle called superposition that claims that while we do not know what the state of any object is, it is actually in all possible states simultaneously, as long as we don't look to check.

After reading this I am at this point total at loss to what is actually going.
So if one is to understand an object ceases to be on the ground of lack of referral or reference units.
Presumable that includes a human a box fire or a word anything that is visual to the naked eye is an object/abject.

The worst is not over yet because the cat comes up, confusion all around, Cat or Schrodinger's Cat.
What is a cat doing in a box let alone a lead box? is my gut reaction ? then I read on:

First, we have a living cat and place it in a thick lead box. At this stage, there is no question that the cat is alive. We then throw in a vial of cyanide and seal the box. We do not know if the cat is alive or if it has broken the cyanide capsule and died. Since we do not know, the cat is both dead and alive, according to quantum law - in a superposition of states. It is only when we break open the box and see what condition the cat is that the superposition is lost, and the cat must be either alive or dead

Anyone care to add or maybe clarify how the cat and quantum are related?
I must add that I do like cats and quantum but I do not like physics if it helps at all haha.

[Charles Darnay]

"Lasciate ogne speranza, voi ch'intrate"

[hillwalker]

Quantum theory as I understand it implies there are an infinite number of realities - and any one of those can co-exist until we interfere by actually 'looking' at one of those realities.
That act of looking and determining which reality is the one we can actually see is enough to make all the other possible realities redundant and to make the reality we do see the only true reality at that moment of looking.
With me so far?

So the act of opening the box makes only one reality possible - a reality in which the cat is either dead or alive. Before we interfered by opening the box the cat was both dead and alive because both realities were possible until proven otherwise.
See - it's simple.
I also used to hate Physics in school.

H

[YesNo]

The worst is not over yet because the cat comes up, confusion all around, Cat or Schrodinger's Cat.
What is a cat doing in a box let alone a lead box? is my gut reaction ? then I read on:

First of all, I'm no expert on this and not a physicist. I would like to understand this better myself.

As I understand it at the moment, this use of a cat was a concept designed by Schrodinger to challenge or perhaps mock Bohr. He tried to imply that quantum theory was missing something in its probabilistic interpretation of reality. This would not happen to a real cat because it is too big, but it would happen to some quantum particle whose state was unknown until it was observed. The cat is an exaggeration.

[cacian]

"Lasciate ogne speranza, voi ch'intrate"

LOL
''canto di mane el papa mandare alora por favora''

First of all, I'm no expert on this and not a physicist. I would like to understand this better myself.

As I understand it at the moment, this use of a cat was a concept designed by Schrodinger to challenge or perhaps mock Bohr. He tried to imply that quantum theory was missing something in its probabilistic interpretation of reality. This would not happen to a real cat because it is too big, but it would happen to some quantum particle whose state was unknown until it was observed. The cat is an exaggeration.

Hi YesNo I think I am a bit lost like you haha. I find the Cat most confusing because the first bit here is this:

''we have a living cat and place it in a thick lead box. At this stage, there is no question that the cat is alive''

At this point I am thinking what? no air in the box for the poor cat can only mean death. Unless I am reading this wrong. It is a lead box which air tight. So the concept in itself is wrong and there would no needfor cynade to show the cat is dead. The lack of air would do it.

Anyway I was thinking along the lines of photographic memory.
Once the mind had it in place first that the cat when put was alive then that is the point.
What we do not know is what memory does not grasp it will remember hence confirm that the cat was alive when put in the box.
If one takes a camera and takes a picture of the cat being put in the box that is the only picture we have.
What we don't know we cannot take picture of.

[QUOTE]

Quantum theory as I understand it implies there are an infinite number of realities - and any one of those can co-exist until we interfere by actually 'looking' at one of those realities.
That act of looking and determining which reality is the one we can actually see is enough to make all the other possible realities redundant and to make the reality we do see the only true reality at that moment of looking.
With me so far?

Hummm let see yes maybe but what about naming things? If a name something then surely I have quantified it.
It is reactionary to name an object.

So the act of opening the box makes only one reality possible - a reality in which the cat is either dead or alive. Before we interfered by opening the box the cat was both dead and alive because both realities were possible until proven otherwise.
See - it's simple.
I also used to hate Physics in school.

H

I am not sure I agree because the only reality I am able to state is that there is a cat in the box because I put there.
Dead or alive is secondary and therefore unimportant.
Dead does not mean it does not exist. It just mean it's there but not alive. That is one reality that counts for something.
Well that is how I see it.

Here is a question about quantum.
How many temperature/s are they a day?

[Lokasenna]

...

...

...

...

...you do know the cat is a metaphor, right?

[cacian]

...

...

...

...

...you do know the cat is a metaphor, right?

Yes and no I had my doubts when I came across it and started reading it.
I realise cruelty would not allow for it.
But it is a metaphor that is easily reality ie doable hence my overseeing being a metaphor for about a moment or two.
I guess my trust on people not to carry on the test using a cat I would not have excluded knowing their history of animal abuse.

[TheFifthElement]

You should read How to Teach Quantum Physics to Your Dog by Chad Orzel. It's a good introduction to quantum theory for a lay person.

[YesNo]

Hi YesNo I think I am a bit lost like you haha. I find the Cat most confusing because the first bit here is this:

''we have a living cat and place it in a thick lead box. At this stage, there is no question that the cat is alive''

At this point I am thinking what? no air in the box for the poor cat can only mean death. Unless I am reading this wrong. It is a lead box which air tight. So the concept in itself is wrong and there would no needfor cynade to show the cat is dead. The lack of air would do it.

Anyway I was thinking along the lines of photographic memory.
Once the mind had it in place first that the cat when put was alive then that is the point.
What we do not know is what memory does not grasp it will remember hence confirm that the cat was alive when put in the box.
If one takes a camera and takes a picture of the cat being put in the box that is the only picture we have.
What we don't know we cannot take picture of.

Being in a state where "alive" is superimposed on "dead" doesn't happen to cats. At no time is a cat both alive and dead. It is either alive or dead. You don't have to worry about someone trying this experiment on any real cat.

However, a quantum particle could be in an unknown state with regards to, say, "spin". For the particle, the spin could be either "up" or "down" which are contradictory states like being alive or dead. Until someone checks, there is just a probability for what the spin would turn out to be.

Einstein and Schrodinger had no problem with probability, but they figured the probability was caused by not having enough information. If they could get all the information contained in the "hidden variables", they would be able to say what the spin was of the particle before anyone checked. However, it turns out there is no other information. There are no hidden variables. So Bohr's side claimed the particle had both up and down spin until someone checked. That is like saying it was both alive and dead.

Schrodinger didn't like this and so he created the cat paradox. The paradox breaks down because he assumed that a cat has the same kind of reality as a quantum particle. He wanted to show that quantum theory did not make sense as Bohr was presenting it.

Suppose the hypothetical cat was in the box for 60 minutes and the cyanide was released 30 minutes after the cat was placed in the box. When did the cat actually die? Most people would agree with Einstein and Schrodinger (and likely also Bohr) and say that the cat died after being in the box 30 minutes, even though no one checked until 60 minutes later. Were the cat a quantum particle, quantum theory would say it "died" only after the box was opened 60 minutes later. Before that it was both alive and dead.

Neither Einstein nor Schrodinger liked that way of dealing with quantum particles, but that is the way these particles seem to behave.

Anyway, that's how I see this at the moment.

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

Isn't there some physics/science forum you could find to ask questions such as these? You'd probably get better responses, and I'm sure another forum would appreciate you're conversation starters as much as we do.

[YesNo]

I actually like cacian's conversation starters.

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

Now, whatever gave you the idea that I don't?

[cacian]

You should read How to Teach Quantum Physics to Your Dog by Chad Orzel. It's a good introduction to quantum theory for a lay person.

Thank TheFifthElement I shall have a read. I noticed you are reading too.
Any that stood out in your mind as you are. I just thought I will ask.
Thanks!

[Delta40]

Now, whatever gave you the idea that I don't?

Errr the sly look in your eyes?

[MorpheusSandman]

For those looking for a good intro to QP and MW, I recommend Yudkowsky's online sequence: http://lesswrong.com/lw/r5/the_quant...sics_sequence/