Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Log inSign up
Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Blog
Job Board
Q3AS

© 2026 Aqora Quantum S.A.S.

TermsPrivacyLegal Notice

Science

New Additions to the Schrödinger Cat Family

Nicolas Gisin

Published Apr 6, 2006• 5 citations
Publisher

Abstract

Schrödinger cat states entail superpositions of seemingly opposite quantum states, metaphorically like a cat being both dead and alive. Femotsecond laser pulses can now induce photons into small and unbound Schrödinger kitten states
DOI
10.1126/science.1125584

Related papers

Schrodinger's Cat at Hand

B. A. B. Seiders

Letters from: [ Andras Malnasi Csizmadia and Achilles J. Sanchez ][1] [ Randy Morse ][1] [ Barbara A. B. Seiders ][1] [ Paul C. S. Hoaken ][1] [ Andrew Ahlgren ][1] When the Schrodinger cat paradox was first proposed in 1935, it was difficult to envision an experimental system in which to model Schrodinger's experiment. But C. Monroe et al. describe such a system in their research article “A ‘Schrodinger cat’ superposition state of an atom” ([24 May, p. 1131][2]). In an accompanying Research News article ([24 May, p. 1101][3]), Gary Taubes writes > … Erwin Schrodinger described a cat shut up in what he called a “diabolical device”: a closed box also containing a small amount of a radioactive substance. Over the course of an hour, the radioactive substance has a 50-50 chance of decaying. If it does, the decay is detected by a counter, which shatters a flask of deadly acid, killing the cat. If it doesn't, the cat lives. But for the experiment to be a true paradox, the box must contain only one radioactive atom, as specified by Schrodinger. If there are numerous atoms in the box, it is a statistical certainty that at least one atom (but we cannot know which one) will decay in the course of the experiment, and the unfortunate cat will undoubtedly be killed. If, on the other hand, there is only one or very few atoms in the box, we will not know whether the cat is dead or alive. # {#article-title-2} As a naive molecular biologist, I am perplexed by one facet of the problem of Schrodinger's cat as it is usually presented. Why can't the cat be considered an observer and therefore remove the uncertainty about its own life or death status? # {#article-title-3} My 12-year-old daughter Phoebe is a student of quantum paradoxes, but she was concerned about an error in the illustration accompanying the Research News article with regard to feline anatomy. Presumably, even Schrodinger's cat would have foreleg “elbows,” not “knees.” # {#article-title-4} The title of the Research News article “Schizophrenic atom doubles as Schrodinger's cat—or kitten” perpetuates a misconception about schizophrenia—which is nothing like split personality—and trivializes a potentially disabling mental disorder. # {#article-title-5} “Kitten,” as used by Taubes, seems needlessly macroscopic as a metaphor for a single trapped atom. How about “Schrodinger's furball”? [1]: /lookup/doi/10.1126/science.273.5277.857e [2]: /lookup/volpage/273/1131 [3]: /lookup/volpage/273/1101

Science•Aug 16, 1996•2 citations

Schrödinger Cat States in Quantum Optics

David Vitali

Springer eBooks•Jan 1, 1997•0 citations

Properties and Generation of Photon-Added Schrodinger Cat States

Wang, Zhong-Jie, Zhang +3 more

理论物理通讯：英文版•Jan 1, 2012•0 citations

Schizophrenic Atom Doubles as Schrödinger's Cat—or Kitten

Gary Taubes

Schrödinger's cat has always been an elusive beast, but physicists may have finally trapped one in the laboratory. In the great Austrian physicist's thought experiment, the fate of a cat was linked to the quantum indeterminacy of a radioactive atom—half decayed, half undecayed. The cat, as a result, was both alive and dead. Now physicists at the National Institute of Standards and Technology in Boulder, Colorado, report in this issue ( p. 1131 ) that they have created what one observer calls a “Schrödinger's kitten,” in which they excite an atom into a superposition of quantum states, then ease those two states apart so that the atom appears to be in two distinct physical locations simultaneously.

Science•May 24, 1996•12 citations

Generation of Optical Schrödinger “Cat” States Using Intense Laser-Matter Interactions and Applications in Non-linear Optics

Nikolaos Tsatrafyllis, Theocharis Lamprou, Marcelo F. Ciappina +2 more

Topics in applied physics•Jan 1, 2026•0 citations

Bell Inequalities with Schrödinger Cats

M. D. Reid

Abstract In the Schrödinger cat gedanken experiment a “cat” is in a quantum superposition of two macroscopically distinct states. There is the apparent interpretation that the “cat” is not in one state or the other, “alive” or “dead”. Here this interpretation is proved objectively. I propose the following definition of macroscopic reality: first, that the “cat” is either dead or alive, the measurement revealing which; second, that measurements on other “cats” some distance away cannot induce the macroscopic change, “dead” to “alive” and vice versa, to the “cat”. The predictions of quantum mechanics are shown to be incompatible with this premise.

Zeitschrift für Naturforschung A•Feb 1, 2001•5 citations
Letters from: [ Andras Malnasi Csizmadia and Achilles J. Sanchez ][1] [ Randy Morse ][1] [ Barbara A. B. Seiders ][1] [ Paul C. S. Hoaken ][1] [ Andrew Ahlgren ][1] When the Schrodinger cat paradox was first proposed in 1935, it was difficult to envision an experimental system in which to model Schrodinger's experiment. But C. Monroe et al. describe such a system in their research article “A ‘Schrodinger cat’ superposition state of an atom” ([24 May, p. 1131][2]). In an accompanying Research News article ([24 May, p. 1101][3]), Gary Taubes writes > … Erwin Schrodinger described a cat shut up in what he called a “diabolical device”: a closed box also containing a small amount of a radioactive substance. Over the course of an hour, the radioactive substance has a 50-50 chance of decaying. If it does, the decay is detected by a counter, which shatters a flask of deadly acid, killing the cat. If it doesn't, the cat lives. But for the experiment to be a true paradox, the box must contain only one radioactive atom, as specified by Schrodinger. If there are numerous atoms in the box, it is a statistical certainty that at least one atom (but we cannot know which one) will decay in the course of the experiment, and the unfortunate cat will undoubtedly be killed. If, on the other hand, there is only one or very few atoms in the box, we will not know whether the cat is dead or alive. # {#article-title-2} As a naive molecular biologist, I am perplexed by one facet of the problem of Schrodinger's cat as it is usually presented. Why can't the cat be considered an observer and therefore remove the uncertainty about its own life or death status? # {#article-title-3} My 12-year-old daughter Phoebe is a student of quantum paradoxes, but she was concerned about an error in the illustration accompanying the Research News article with regard to feline anatomy. Presumably, even Schrodinger's cat would have foreleg “elbows,” not “knees.” # {#article-title-4} The title of the Research News article “Schizophrenic atom doubles as Schrodinger's cat—or kitten” perpetuates a misconception about schizophrenia—which is nothing like split personality—and trivializes a potentially disabling mental disorder. # {#article-title-5} “Kitten,” as used by Taubes, seems needlessly macroscopic as a metaphor for a single trapped atom. How about “Schrodinger's furball”? [1]: /lookup/doi/10.1126/science.273.5277.857e [2]: /lookup/volpage/273/1131 [3]: /lookup/volpage/273/1101
Schrödinger's cat has always been an elusive beast, but physicists may have finally trapped one in the laboratory. In the great Austrian physicist's thought experiment, the fate of a cat was linked to the quantum indeterminacy of a radioactive atom—half decayed, half undecayed. The cat, as a result, was both alive and dead. Now physicists at the National Institute of Standards and Technology in Boulder, Colorado, report in this issue ( p. 1131 ) that they have created what one observer calls a “Schrödinger's kitten,” in which they excite an atom into a superposition of quantum states, then ease those two states apart so that the atom appears to be in two distinct physical locations simultaneously.
Abstract In the Schrödinger cat gedanken experiment a “cat” is in a quantum superposition of two macroscopically distinct states. There is the apparent interpretation that the “cat” is not in one state or the other, “alive” or “dead”. Here this interpretation is proved objectively. I propose the following definition of macroscopic reality: first, that the “cat” is either dead or alive, the measurement revealing which; second, that measurements on other “cats” some distance away cannot induce the macroscopic change, “dead” to “alive” and vice versa, to the “cat”. The predictions of quantum mechanics are shown to be incompatible with this premise.