Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> Warp wrote:
> >   Schrodinger's cat is a thought experiment, not an analogy.

> It's not even that hard to set up. :-)

> I think the point is that you have to question what an "observation" is. If 
> the particle gets emitted and runs into the detector when the power is 
> turned off, is it "observed"?  If the power is on but the detector isn't 
> connected to anything?  If it's connected to a speaker you can't hear? If 
> it's connected to poison but there's no cat in the box?  Etc?

> In other words, if it takes an "observer" to collapse the wave function, is 
> the cat enough of an "observer" to count? If so, how does the human get 
> involved? According to the math, the cat is still superimposed. But that 
> would imply the cat isn't sufficiently an observer to cause the collapse. 
> *Or* that the math doesn't match reality. And multi-worlds is an attempt to 
> say "no, the math really matches reality."

  AFAIK those are the things Erwin Schr?dinger questioned about the
Copenhagen interpretation with his now-famous thought experiment.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message