Re: Rovelli on EPR
- From: Eugene Stefanovich <eugenev@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 09:22:35 +0000 (UTC)
Oh No wrote:
There is a lot of difference between saying "I don't know whether the
cat is alive or dead" and saying "The cat is some peculiar mixed state
of being alive or dead". I maintain that quantum mechanics is simply
saying the former.
I think it is a wrong way to think about quantum mechanics.
First, when you perform a measurement on the cat you can say with
full certainty whether it is dead or alive. The question is only
about the theoretical description. Can the theory (=quantum mechanics)
predict the result of the measurement before it is done? The answer is
'no'. In the "Schroedinger cat" situation, quantum mechanics does not
give you a definite answer. It only gives you the probabilities of
possible outcomes. You can say (together with Einstein) that this
means that quantum mechanics is not a complete theory. I can agree with
that. But this is the best theory we have.
The peculiar superposition "dead + alive" does not refer to the individual cat,
but to the ensemble of identically prepared cats in identical boxes.
If you keep in mind that the wavefunction provides you a description
of the ensemble rather that individual system, you can avoid all
kinds of paradoxes with the "wavefunction collapse" and with the role
of "mind" in this collapse.
Eugene.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Rovelli on EPR
- From: Cl.Massé
- Re: Rovelli on EPR
- From: Oh No
- Re: Rovelli on EPR
- References:
- Rovelli on EPR
- From: tttito
- Re: Rovelli on EPR
- From: Oh No
- Re: Rovelli on EPR
- From: John Bell
- Re: Rovelli on EPR
- From: rof
- Re: Rovelli on EPR
- From: Eugene Stefanovich
- Re: Rovelli on EPR
- From: Oh No
- Rovelli on EPR
- Prev by Date: Re: Rovelli on EPR
- Next by Date: Re: Rovelli on EPR
- Previous by thread: Re: Rovelli on EPR
- Next by thread: Re: Rovelli on EPR
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading