tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4166268588579831806.post8942402507420668007..comments2024-03-04T23:05:17.834-05:00Comments on Brain in a Vat: Killing Schrodinger’s Cat – Once and For AllAndrew F. Knight, J.D.http://www.blogger.com/profile/12731018050469679896noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4166268588579831806.post-64062538828183694512022-08-29T12:01:40.862-04:002022-08-29T12:01:40.862-04:00Haha... Well, as Scott Aaronson argued in a recent...Haha... Well, as Scott Aaronson argued in a recent paper ("On the Hardness of Detecting Macroscopic Superpositions" here: https://arxiv.org/abs/2009.07450), it is at least as hard to create Schrodinger's Cat as to bring a dead cat back to life. So, yes, the physicists who actually believe that SC or Wigner's Friend is possible must accept that Pauli or Schrodinger can be brought back to life. Thanks for the great insight.Andrew F. Knight, J.D.https://www.blogger.com/profile/12731018050469679896noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4166268588579831806.post-21832544832108195842022-08-25T20:45:06.191-04:002022-08-25T20:45:06.191-04:00Wigner’ sisters husband, is of more interest.
I’v...Wigner’ sisters husband, is of more interest.<br /><br />I’ve always found the thought experiment SC to be quite amusing, and think it was meant to be. An easy way to explain the randomness evident in QM, what a system is, what an observer is, what a measurement is, and the mathematical interpretations we may use before and after such an experiment. (There isn’t any difficulties, or wasn’t, before someone made them.) Everyone understood the cat was in fact either dead or alive, and that we had some maths useful to describe what was called a superposition.<br /><br />The difficulties and derived errors started when QM was mystified, shortly after Bell did his greatest error ever. And sometime into the eighties with nothing to show, the magic show got momentum.<br /><br />What used to be the observer, the scientists with the box, the one opening it and sorting for dead and alive, documenting and analyzing, wasn’t anymore. Now, the not only the mechanism triggered, but the decaying material triggering became the “observer”.<br /><br />I would assume it happened in 1984, just because of the book. <br /><br />When the observer can be part of an interferometer, it must follow one can sort bombs so unstable a single photon would set it off! With no classical and stringent need for distinct difference between “a measurer”, “an observer” etc, and everyone floating happily around ideas, feeling being part of an elite group no one outside could understand, the next rapid steps was easy.<br /><br />“The system” is not a box with a cat, it’s even not the scientist in his lab with every tool available, it’s a crackpot idea of how one’s consciousness influences superpositions backwards in time.<br /><br />How will Wolfgang Pauli or Schrödinger react when I adjust mu interferometers and bring them back?Erik SBnoreply@blogger.com