Erwin Schrödinger, one of the founders of quantum theory, introduced his thought experiment that involves the poor animal in his 1935 paper “The present situation in quantum mechanics”1. According to the orthodox interpretation of quantum mechanics, a cat locked in a chamber with a radioactive material that can trigger a killing poison would be in “neither alive nor dead state” until someone “looks” inside, in order to check. This “neither alive nor dead state” is, according to the orthodox quantum theory, a “superposition” of “cat alive” and “cat dead” states.
Then Schrödinger focuses on “knowledge”, on “what do I know”, instead of focusing on what “objectively happens”. That is why he got himself into a “paradox”, and his paradox has been examined again and again in hundreds if not thousands of papers and books by physicists and by philosophers ever since. A typical conclusion is that reached by John Gribbin in his book “In Search of Schrödinger’s Cat”2: “there is no underlying reality to the world.”
The Reality of Superselection
Again we seem to be dealing with a typical example of compartmentalized thinking that is so typical for authoritarians. John Gribbin is an astrophysicist and certainly he has studied the subject before writing about it. So, Gribbin must have known the term “superselection rules”, introduced by Wick, Wightman and Wigner in their 1952, and 1970 papers34.
In 1974 Strocchi and Wightman gave a rigorous proof of “charge superselection rules”, which means that two states of any system that carries different electric charges are “classically different”, that is, performing “quantum superpositions” of such states is meaningless. It would be rather strange if “cat alive” and cat “dead” had exactly the same electric charge, up to one electron! But John Gribbin evidently did not think about that. His thinking was probably compartmentalized and certain facts - those that would contradict some of the authorities he followed - have been put into a non-active part of his mind, if not ignored entirely.
1Reprinted in W. Zurek et al, Quantum Theory and Measurement”, Princeton University Press, 1983
2John Gribbin, “In Search of Schrodinger’s Cat”, Bantam Books, 1984
3Wick, G. C., Wightman, A. S., & Wigner, E. P. (1952). The intrinsic parity of elementary particles. Physical Review, 88, 101-105.
4Wick, G. C., Wightman, A. S., & Wigner, E. P. (1970). Superselection rule for charge. Physical Review D, 1, 3267-3269
P.S.1.My wife likes this... so this is for her. Very REAL.
I am convinced that the world is one and real.
ReplyDeleteI have never had contact with inexplicable phenomena in the long run. Many initially astonishing events (e.g. of the prestigitator type) turned out to be completely explainable after some time.
"Many". I think that many people never been in Wołomin Does that mean that Wołomin is not real? I don't think so. But I understand your hesitation of accepting the reality of such phenomena. It complicates our already complicated life.
DeleteBjab -> Ark
DeleteBut very many people can find Święty Marcin on google map with rather minimal effort.
"It complicates" without learning for the future so it's useless.
There are things that require a minimal effort, and there are other things that require a bigger effort. And there are still other things that require enormous effort.
DeleteAnd I do not think that knowledge is useless for everybody. Some people are curious about things that other people consider a waste of time and energy. "Usefulness" is to a great extent subjective.
Some people want to believe as you wrote, indeed. But not much follows from this certainly correct observation.
DeleteBjab -> Ark
ReplyDeleteSo Schrodinger's cat is dead before opening the box. I feel that it is because atoms are non-linear.
"I feel that it is because atoms are non-linear."
DeleteI think it is even more complex than just "non-linearity".
If we can rely on Bell, also non-locality is needed. Nonlinearity alone people would easily swallow. But non-locality is very hard to swallow for a mainstream physicist. Locality is usually put as an unquestionable axiom.
DeleteArk -> Bjab
DeleteBell - missprint, mistake, flaw.
"Bell - missprint, mistake, flaw."
DeleteWhich exactly means what? The devil is in the details.
Bjab -> Ark
DeleteThat would mean that there is no valid proof that nonlocality is necessary.
Suppose it is indeed the case that "there is no valid proof that nonlocality is necessary." But is also the case that nobody presented so far a valid model of a local classical theory that is able to reproduce all ``quantum effects". Something to think about? Perhaps?
DeleteBjab -> Ark:
Delete"Something to think about?"
Yes, it is.
I too believe that the world is one and real. However, having experienced a number of inexplicable phenomena, I had to think about how that could be. The best explanation that preserves my conviction that the world is one and real is that there is some filter in human beings that prevents them from seeing the World As It Is.
ReplyDeleteIt seems to me that the direct, sensual experience of the world, unclouded by preconceptions or anticipation, is precisely what constitutes scientific empiricism and objectivity. But for some reason, there is something we cannot apprehend because I think that true "inexplicable phenomena" should be subject to explanation.
There is a little known fact about hypnosis that is illustrated by the following story:
A subject was told under hypnosis that when he was awakened he would be unable to see a third man in the room who, it was suggested to him, would have become invisible. All the proper suggestions to make this “true” were given, such as “you will NOT see so- and-so” etc… When the subject was awakened, lo and behold! the suggestions did NOT work.
Why? Because they went against his belief system. He did NOT believe that a person could become invisible.
So, another trial was made. The subject was hypnotized again and was told that the third man was leaving the room… that he had been called away on urgent business, and the scene of him getting on his coat and hat was described… the door was opened and shut to provide sound effects, and then the subject was brought out of the trance.
Guess what happened?
He was UNABLE TO SEE the Third Man.
Why? Because his perceptions were modified according to his beliefs. Certain “censors” in his brain were activated in a manner that was acceptable to his ego survival instincts.
That is what I think we need to deal with in order to understand and explain "inexplicable phenomena" - the automatic censors in our brain/mind. And some people have more of them than others. If your reality is significantly different from mine, then one or both of us is not seeing the objective reality. The truth.