scott wrote:
>>> If a cat's status is not decided until someone looks inside
>>
>> Since that isn't true, it's a meaningless question to ask.
> 
> I thought the whole point of that experiment was that according to QM 
> the cat was both alive and dead until you actually tried to look?

That's correct. But it's clearly not true, because the *cat* is observing 
the situation, right? Of course the cat's status is decided by the cat 
before anyone looks in the box, and thus there must be something wrong with 
the concept that states remain in superposition until "observed." The point 
was to ask "how observed does it need to be?"

I.e., the whole point of the experiment is to show how absurd it was to 
think the QM "collapsed because it's observed" promoters were right.

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   Human nature dictates that toothpaste tubes spend
   much longer being almost empty than almost full.

Post a reply to this message