0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

It is not that complicated.The wave function depends on the numbers of observers but the anomaly always has a chance. Dead cat can be found alive with probability depending upon the observers.If there is only one observer then the Event has a greater chance to show a dead cat as alive.Chances of event manifestation depends on the history of observers who share common truth.

I was wondering - someone opens the box & sees whether the cat is dead or alive. Then he shuts the box & runs away without telling anyone what he saw.Another someone (not of the George variety, just a random other) comes along & sees the box. Now, he doesn't know Mr First Someone has had a peek, so is ignorant of the fact that the cat's health has been ascertained. In fact, Mr First Someone may have let the cat out of the box & taken it with him. That means there are now 3 possibilities for the puddytat - alive, dead, & gorn!So how does Mr First Someone's actions affect the waveform? Does it remain collapsed after he ascertains the aliveness or deadness of the cat regardless the fact Mr Another Someone is ignorant of the situation?

Quote from: DoctorBeaver on 30/09/2007 16:51:06I was wondering - someone opens the box & sees whether the cat is dead or alive. Then he shuts the box & runs away without telling anyone what he saw.Another someone (not of the George variety, just a random other) comes along & sees the box. Now, he doesn't know Mr First Someone has had a peek, so is ignorant of the fact that the cat's health has been ascertained. In fact, Mr First Someone may have let the cat out of the box & taken it with him. That means there are now 3 possibilities for the puddytat - alive, dead, & gorn!So how does Mr First Someone's actions affect the waveform? Does it remain collapsed after he ascertains the aliveness or deadness of the cat regardless the fact Mr Another Someone is ignorant of the situation? But who knows there were two observers?If there is a third observer, that sees the first observer, and then sees the second observer, then the third observer in theory has seen both events.On the other hand, if there is no common observer to link the two observations, then for all practical purposes, there was only ever one observer (i.e. each observer only knows of one or the other observer, and so in each observers world, he is the only observer).In essence, the concept is no different than regarding the cat itself as being the first observer, even before the first human observer has opened the box.

All wave functions collapse in the brain.One observer can find the Dead Cat observation contradicted with Live cat observation.The observations can not be shared with others. More the number of observers less likely it is to find the exception.How and what explanation you give depends on you(as a single observer).I would have said the ghost has returned!!But who will believe you?Anyways suppose this can happen what explanation will you give?

As a consequence if you promise not to tell anyone then you can travel at speeds greater than that of light. You can observe weird things.You can find things like ghosts!!

Maintaining realism as a fundamental concept would therefore necessitate the introduction of 'spooky' actions that defy locality. Here we show by both theory and experiment that a broad and rather reasonable class of such non-local realistic theories is incompatible with experimentally observable quantum correlations.

George - I understand all of that. But what about the waveform? Is there a waveform for each observer or just 1 waveform that collapses then un-collapses?

George - would it be true to say that it is the probability of an observer finding the cat in a particular state rather than simply the probability of the cat being in that state?

If that is the case then Mr First observing the cat will have no effect on Mr Second's probability function.Oh, actually it would as Mr Second could find the box empty due to the action of Mr First. So, in that respect, Mr First has affected Mr Second's probability wave as prior to Mr First's involvement the cat could only have been in 2 states - alive or dead - and now there are 3 possibilities.So if you were calculating Mr Second's probability function with passing time, you wouldn't be able to factor in the probability of the cat not being there if you were unaware that Mr First had opened the box.

If the first observer does change the outcome for the second observer, then they can no longer be regarded as independent outcomes, and so the wave must be collapsed when the first observer looks in.

But with the glass top, the observer has still looked inside and an outcome of his observation been made. I still think each observer contributes to the outcome, that way it is different everytime.Each has their own influence or wave upon that of the cats..assuming the cat is in the box.

You are losing me now. But saying that, why should it be limited to human observation?

If we refer to the original thought experiment, surely the CAT would know whether it were alive or not. Hence the quantum problem is resolved.

Can the cat still be the initial observer if it is not alive?

Quote from: paul.fr on 02/10/2007 00:50:24Can the cat still be the initial observer if it is not alive?Why not?If I were to look inside the box, and make my observations, and then write notes for someone else to see, and then promptly keel over with a massive heart attack (or overcome by the cyanide because I failed to take adequate precautions when opening the box); then my observations are still valid, as I have documented them and passed that information on to my successor.