Number47
First Post
Have to post because I'm a stickler
Schrödinger was a physicist. He came up with a metaphor that is stilled used today in quantum physics (actually, it was more than a metaphor then, but things have changed). If an effect has a 50% probability of changing a particle's quantum state (basically, chance of particles to interact or change), then quantum physics state that the quantum function (read: particle), exists in both states until measured. So, in Schrödinger's thought-experiment, you put a cat in a box. The cat is undetectable from outside the box (sight and sound-proofed). Underneath the box is a canister of cyanide. The canister can be broken if a particular element decays and fires a neutron at it. The particular element has a 50% chance to decay in the time alloted. No quantum physics states that element both does and does not decay in the time alloted until measured, so the canister both does and does not break, so the cat is both alive and dead until measured. This is just one example of "quantum weirdness". I won't bother to go into details about why physicists know that this does happen on a quantum level (been shown in experiment), but does not happen on a macroscopic level (a cat is either alive or dead, period).
Sorry for the hijack, Piratecat.
No, I'm not a physicist. I just read.
Edit: I see that RangerWickett has posted before I did. Couple things to note: Schrödinger put together the mathematical formulas that still used, largely unchanged, to describe a quantum system. Heisenberg's Uncertainty principles touch on that, but you have it slightly off. To solve for a particle's location with increasing precision, the precision of the measurement of it's momentum becomes increasingly imprecise. Solving for momentum leaves imprecise location. Achieving perfect precision in either means knowing nothing of the other value. The best metaphor is this, imagine a guy running a race. You can choose to measure either his speed or his location with a single measurement. To measure his speed, you could use a radar gun. You shoot the gun at him and the wave travels to him and back. You know precisely how fast he was going in that instant, but it's hard to say exactly where he was at the instant the speed was measured. Conversely, you could instead take a photograph at a specific point in time. At that instant, you know exactly where the runner is, but because the photo is static, you have no idea how fast he was going. The tricky thing about quantum mechanics is that you cannot hook up your radar gun to a camera. A particle can only be subject to one measurement at a time, after which the act of measurement itself has changed the particle.
"Temperature" has nothing to do with Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle, because that has no meaning on a quantum level.
Schrödinger was a physicist. He came up with a metaphor that is stilled used today in quantum physics (actually, it was more than a metaphor then, but things have changed). If an effect has a 50% probability of changing a particle's quantum state (basically, chance of particles to interact or change), then quantum physics state that the quantum function (read: particle), exists in both states until measured. So, in Schrödinger's thought-experiment, you put a cat in a box. The cat is undetectable from outside the box (sight and sound-proofed). Underneath the box is a canister of cyanide. The canister can be broken if a particular element decays and fires a neutron at it. The particular element has a 50% chance to decay in the time alloted. No quantum physics states that element both does and does not decay in the time alloted until measured, so the canister both does and does not break, so the cat is both alive and dead until measured. This is just one example of "quantum weirdness". I won't bother to go into details about why physicists know that this does happen on a quantum level (been shown in experiment), but does not happen on a macroscopic level (a cat is either alive or dead, period).
Sorry for the hijack, Piratecat.
No, I'm not a physicist. I just read.
Edit: I see that RangerWickett has posted before I did. Couple things to note: Schrödinger put together the mathematical formulas that still used, largely unchanged, to describe a quantum system. Heisenberg's Uncertainty principles touch on that, but you have it slightly off. To solve for a particle's location with increasing precision, the precision of the measurement of it's momentum becomes increasingly imprecise. Solving for momentum leaves imprecise location. Achieving perfect precision in either means knowing nothing of the other value. The best metaphor is this, imagine a guy running a race. You can choose to measure either his speed or his location with a single measurement. To measure his speed, you could use a radar gun. You shoot the gun at him and the wave travels to him and back. You know precisely how fast he was going in that instant, but it's hard to say exactly where he was at the instant the speed was measured. Conversely, you could instead take a photograph at a specific point in time. At that instant, you know exactly where the runner is, but because the photo is static, you have no idea how fast he was going. The tricky thing about quantum mechanics is that you cannot hook up your radar gun to a camera. A particle can only be subject to one measurement at a time, after which the act of measurement itself has changed the particle.
"Temperature" has nothing to do with Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle, because that has no meaning on a quantum level.
Last edited:
