The Schrodinger's Cat Visually Explained: Is The Cat Dead or Alive?

Is the cat alive? Is it dead?
I bet you know what we are talking about: it’s probably one of the most famous cats in the world! Indeed, we are talking about Schrödinger’s cat. This is a famous paradox that tries to illustrate how weird the microscopic world is, by applying concepts of quantum mechanics to everyday life… and the consequences are very bizarre!
Before talking about Schrödinger’s cat, let’s introduce briefly its ‘owner’ first. Erwin Schrödinger was an Austrian physicist born in 1887. He provided several important contributions in many fields of physics, such as statistical mechanics, cosmology, and thermodynamics. However, his most notable results were probably those related to quantum mechanics.

- -

Credits: Nasa/Shutterstock/Storyblocks/Elon Musk/SpaceX/ESA/ESO/ Flickr

Video Chapters:
00:00 Introduction
00:35 Who is Erwin Schrödinger?
01:35 The Paradox
06:40 Wave function collapse
11:17 Conclusion

#insanecuriosity #cats #Schrodinger'sCatExplained

[InsaneCuriosity]

Hey Insane Curiosity Squad! If you liked the video, we would love for you to share it with your friends or on other social networks like Facebook, Reddit, Instagram, TikTok and Twitter, etc... (Since the algorithm is not cooperating in showing us to the public 😅). In just 30 seconds, you will greatly help our Channel to grow and improve future contents. A big thank you from all of us.

[bpo]

This must be an extremely complicated concept to explain to the average layman (like me) because I've yet to see anyone do it well. I remember (on Reddit maybe?) someone asking for an ELI5 explanation of this theory and some answers started off with Quantum mechanics, lol.

[jba]

I pulled up this video because I subscribe to this channel and always like to watch whenever a new video pops up but coincidentally I am also wearing my Schrodinger‘s cat T-shirt too.

[RED.HWK]

Thank you for the effort explaining the paradox. This one is the best explanation I found so far and yet I still can't understand it, maybe because I do not have any knowledge of quantum physics and my logical mind will never be able to accept as fact that simply observing can change a physical or quantum state.
I can easily understand particles behave as wave but not observing having an impact on the result...

[МаксимЯромич]

If we find the quantum universe bizarre, it is us who are bizarre :) because the reality is always ‘normal’ by definition

[markeyf]

It's sad the average person can only do this for particles, ive met someone that "Mandela effects" things into reality through this principal,
Literally don't know what to call them, a wizard?
He explained to me it has to do with unmanipulating luck and story building with extremeist belief, that only a self realized person can create. The particle "feels" "facing judgement on your starlight bleeding presence" it's easier as a little particle, this changing is just that.. "it has free will as well" hilariously
Im sure someone else can figure it out,
Someone already did without any of those instruments.

[Tmanw]

I'm just here to say "What if we colonized Europe" haha.

[jedu]

Isn't the particle interacting with the physical world when meausred by the giga counter. and so, the world decides upon the outcome prior to the box's opening. It doesn't have to be a person observing it.

[niskamelchionne]

If you put a cat in a box with no holes in box the cat will die with no air to breath. Hope that man didn't do that it's abuse

[bigd]

Never earn anyone used the term anticlockwise I was always taught counterclockwise and is Schrodinger actually pronounced that way

[Alexandra-ngih]

wouldn’t the cat know if it’s dead or alive?

[mm-dwrr]

Another life and death topic! Bring it on. 😪

[Some_Cat_]

I like the thumbnail.





Well, half of it anyway.

[wmstuckey]

Great introduction to Schrodinger's Cat. Allow me to add something to it using quantum information theory.

What people fail to mention when talking about quantum superposition using Schrodinger's Cat is the difference between a classical bit of information (like a computer bit being on or off) and a quantum bit of information (a qubit). Both bits produce one of two outcomes when queried (measured), but a classical bit has only one measurement possible while a qubit can be measured in many different ways (infinitely many, actually), each with two possible outcomes.

For example, when you pass an electron through an inhomogeneous magnetic field, the electron is either deflected towards the North magnetic pole ("up") or towards the South magnetic pole ("down"). You can orient the N-S magnetic field in any direction you like and the electrons will still give one of those two outcomes, so electron spin is a qubit with two outcomes of spin "up" and spin "down" relative the the N-S magnetic field. Now suppose you pass electrons through a N-S magnetic field oriented vertically and then send those that were deflected "up" (literally up in this case) to a N-S magnetic field oriented horizontally. What do you expect to find?

Well since the electrons have vertical spin up and spin is a vector (picture an arrow pointing upward here), then you probably expect the electron to pass straight through the horizontal magnetic field, i.e., they won't be deflected left or right at all ("up" or "down" relative to the horizontal N-S field). That's because the electron's spin vector (arrow) points up which means it doesn't point side-to-side (left of right) at all, so your horizontal spin measurement of a vertical spin up electron should seemingly yield a result of zero horizontal spin. But what you find instead is that 50% of the vertical spin up electrons are deflected left ("up" towards North pole) and 50% are deflected right ("down" towards South pole). True, 50% left plus 50% right *averages* to zero, but that's not what you expect from the measurement of a vector quantity in ordinary classical mechanics. [Aside: Quantum mechanics gives the classically expected results on average over the discrete or quantum measurement outcomes.] This is quantum superposition, a vertical spin up electron is a quantum superposition of 50% horizontal spin left and 50% horizontal spin right and we write that as |V+> = |H+> + |H-> (divided by root 2 for normalization, but I don't need that to make my point).

The point here is the horizontal spin measurement of the quantum state |V+> produces each of its two "up"-"down" (left-right) results in 50-50 fashion. This is exactly what you hear people say about Schrodinger's Cat, i.e., you open the box and find the cat is dead with 50% probability or find the cat is alive with 50% probability. With that information alone, Schrodinger's Cat could be a classical bit or a qubit. If Schrodinger's Cat is a qubit, then there must be a measurement of the cat-box system like the vertical spin measurement of the state |V+> that produces |V+>, i.e., |H+> + |H->, with 100% certainty. We know the measurement "open the box" producing "Live Cat"-"Dead Cat" results in 50-50 fashion is analogous to the horizontal spin measurement of |V+>, so what is the measurement of the cat-box system corresponding to |Live Cat> + |Dead Cat> with 100% certainty in analogy with the vertical spin measurement of the state |V+> that produces |V+> with 100% certainty? And what does its outcome mean physically? If you can't articulate that measurement and outcome of the cat-box system, and every possible measurement between that measurement and the "open the box" measurement, then the cat-box system is just a classical bit ... like opening a box to find a ball or no ball. No quantum superposition there 🙂

To read more about the quantum information approach to entanglement for the "general reader, " see "Einstein's Entanglement: Bell Inequalities, Relativity, and the Qubit" due out in June 2024 with Oxford UP.

[clovissimard]

VOILÀ LA SIGNIFICATION DE L'ÉQUATION DE SCHRÖDINGER : UNE INVARIANCE PAR TRANSLATION TEMPORELLE / Dr Clovis Simard.

[kelvincannon]

Why does Schrodinger get his own paradox, for any reason other than he’s a white man, who’s irrelevant to “everyday life” theories gets a place in history, & branded on everyone’s minds alongside other narcissists, irrelevant to everyday life theories, like Einsteins e=mcwhatever! In lamens terms “Shroedingers cat, ” is the same “if a tree fell in the woods, would it make a sound, if no one was there to hear it?” Theory. Or does a bear, take a 💩 in the woods, & wipe its a$$ with a fluffy rabbit” paradoxes?”

[Terra]

Never fully understood this, but your video made it click, thanks!

[Pilot_engineer_]

No Schrodinger's cat.
I am siding with Einstein. God does not play dice.
Paraphrasing Einstein here, " What do you mean that the moon is not there if I am not looking at it?" You might want to tell that to a driver hit by a car he did not see.
The pilot wave theory may be a better explanation. No ghost cat, no disappearing particles, and no dice. This theory needs more development but at the very least it is rational.

[markgarin]

Insane curiosity killed the cat. Should have used a lead box, background radiation would kill the car and independent of the material in the box. He wasn't that smart.

[stemakwest]

So noob here so forgive me. So how do we know what goes on before observing? …how can that change be evidenced? ..or is it theoretical?