arXiv:2104.12488

Why does Schrödinger's cat refuse to be quantic

Dominique-Marie Cabaret, T. Grandou, Perrier, E.

Published Mar 9, 2021• 0 citations

Abstract

Both at formal and philosophical levels, decades of efforts have been devoted to a deciphering of the `quantum enigma', the `crazy way quantum objects behave', to quote R.P. Feynman's words. We posit that the enigma cannot recede without resorting to a thorough questioning of the quantum ontology. In the current paper this questioning is introduced through a revisitation of the famous Schrödinger's cat paradox, and of the main attempts at solving it. Our proposal thereof, is that the quantum world enjoys a sound physical reality (complying, in particular, with the scientifc requirement of experimental reproducibility), but also, that this physical reality calls for an enlarged, and however precise notion of `what is real', such that what is real and actual can be distinguished from what is real but potential

DOI: 10.48550/arxiv.2104.12488

Related papers

The paradox of Schrodinger's cat

C N Villars

Erwin Schrodinger first described the thought-experiment which has since become known as 'the paradox of Schrodinger's cat' 51 years ago. In recent years, popular accounts of quantum mechanics have tended to adopt one or other of the philosophically most extreme solutions to this paradox, i.e. the consciousness hypothesis or the many worlds interpretation. The author attempts to redress the balance by describing what he takes to be the orthodox solution to the paradox which explains the paradox, without recourse to such counterintuitive notions as a cat simultaneously dead and alive or a universe continually splitting into multiple worlds, as being due to a misapplication of the quantum formalism.

Physics EducationJul 1, 19867 citations

Schrödinger's Cat Paradox and Realistic Interpretation from Particle Experiments

Jiaqing Yan

Schrödinger's cat has long been interpreted by the mainstream as intuitive proof of quantum superposition, but its original intention was Schrödinger's irony and reduction to absurdity of the Copenhagen interpretation. This paper points out that the so-called quantum superposition is not the real physical state of microscopic particles, but the uncertainty phenomenon caused by limited observation methods and inevitable measurement interference. Modern double-slit experiments have realized the emission of single electrons and single photons one by one. Even if only one particle is emitted each time, interference fringes still appear after accumulation. This fact directly proves that each particle has a unique and definite position and path at any time, rather than a superposition state passing through double slits simultaneously. The fundamental reason why a single particle can produce interference is that the particle itself vibrates continuously and has wave properties, rather than a metaphysical superposition state. From the four aspects of original intention, experimental evidence, physical nature and logical judgment, this paper thoroughly clarifies the conceptual substitution of superposition, reveals the objective laws of reality, certainty and uniqueness in the microscopic world, and calls on physics to return to rationality, logic and common sense.

Apr 10, 20260 citations

Seeking a Real World

Bruce Rosenblum, Fred Kuttner

Abstract Schrödinger told his cat story to show that quantum theory denied the existence of a physically real world, that quantum theory claimed that observation created the observed reality. That claim does seem crazy. Indeed, if someone on trial convinced the jury that he believed that his looking created the physical world, the jury would likely accept a plea of insanity.

Jun 29, 20060 citations

A Prolegomenon to the Ontology of the Everett Interpretation*

David Wallace

According to the Everett interpretation of quantum mechanics, the apparent paradoxes of quantum theory require no change either in our philosophical attitude toward scientific theories or in the formalism of quantum mechanics itself. Rather, the unaltered theory can be understood as a literal description of physical reality. But the physical reality thus described is one of many noninteracting, approximately classical worlds. These worlds enter the theory not at the fundamental level—they are nowhere to be found in the basic formalism—but at a higher, emergent level; in this sense they are (ontologically speaking) on a par with the ontology of the special sciences.

Oxford University Press eBooksApr 8, 201324 citations

Schrödinger’s cat and her laboratory cousins

Anthony J. Leggett

In a famous 1935 paper, Erwin Schroedinger pointed out the apparently bizarre consequences which flow from the assumption that the formalism of quantum mechanics can be extrapolated from the world of electrons and atoms to the level of our own direct consciousness (the “Cat” paradox). In this paper I first discuss some alleged resolutions of the paradox, then point out that the premise is not self-evident, and define a class of alternative (“macrorealistic”) scenarios. I then review the extent to which the experimental predictions of quantum mechanics are currently tested in the direction of the everyday world, and explain a crucial test, yet to be performed, of these predictions vis-a-vis those of macrorealism.

ESI lectures in mathematics and physicsApr 11, 20131 citation

CAT'S THEORY: Explaining Schrödinger's Cat — Resolving the Measurement Problem Through Triadic Ontology

Coty Austin Trout

Schrödinger's cat paradox has persisted for nearly a century as a demonstration of the apparent absurdity of quantum superposition when extended to macroscopic scales. This technical note demonstrates that the paradox dissolves entirely within the CAT'S Theory framework through the triadic invariant Reality = Pattern × Intent × Presence (P × I × Pr). We argue that the cat is neither "both alive and dead" nor the victim of mysterious collapse. Instead, superposition represents a state where Presence (Pr) has not yet instantiated, yielding P × I × 0 = 0 (potential but not actual). Measurement does not "cause" collapse through mysterious observer effects; it provides the Presence component required for actualization. This resolution eliminates the need for Multiple Worlds or hidden variables while maintaining consistency with quantum mechanical predictions.

Dec 12, 20251 citation