From: nicolaas.vroom@pandora.be
On Sunday, 14 October 2018 02:53:15 UTC+2, Phillip Helbig wrote:
> In article <43e06192-3f95-4626-add0-9c7a737a3a8e@googlegroups.com>,
> Nicolaas Vroom writes:
>
> > Ofcourse you can claim that before you look at the counter, the counter
> > is in a set of states simultaneous (like both dead and alive) but
> > that is of no physical significance.
>
> Note that Schrodinger proposed this experiment precisely in order to
> demonstrate the absurd conclusions which the Copenhagen interpretation
> leads to. At least some other interpretations of quantum mechanics seem
> more sensible to me.
In the book "In search of Schroedingers cat" at page 203, John Gribbin
writes: Thew apparatus in the box is arranged so that the detector is
switched on just long enough so that there is a fift-fifty chance that
one of the atoms in the radioactive material will decay and that the
detector will record a particle."
That means you have to perform this experiment first 1000 times
in order to establish what the half-life is.
Next he writes:
According to the strict Copenhagen interpretation, just as in the two-hole
experiment there is an equal probability that the electron goes through
either hole, and the two overlapping possibilities produce a superposition
of states (1), so in this case the equal probabilities for radioactive decay
and no radioactive decay should produce a superposition of states (2)".
The part near (2) is not clear to me.
What is clear that when you look in the box, you have a 50% chance
that the cat is alive and a 50% chance that the cat is dead.
Because that is the way the experiment is set up.
As such IMO to claim that the cat before you look is in a superposition
state is of physical significance.
The part near (1) is not clear to me.
Interference between water waves is explained because the wave goes
to both holes.
> I'll leave others to answer your other questions.
Nicolaas Vroom
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
