What do you know about Schrödinger Cat? Probably something like this:
一只猫被关在一个盒子里，盒子里有放射源和毒药，当放射源(不可预测地)发出辐射时，毒药就会释放出来。根据量子力学，猫同时是死和活的，直到盒子被打开，猫被观察到。
The story seems to be that Quantum Mechanics is so weird, a cat can be both alive and dead until we look!
Except this misses the point. Here's what Schrödinger wrote:
One can even set upquite ridiculous cases.A cat is penned up in a steel chamber, along with the following device (which must be secured against direct interference by the cat)...
It is typical of these cases that an indeterminacy originally restricted to the atomic domain becomes transformed into macroscopic indeterminacy, which can then be resolved by direct observation.这阻止了我们如此天真地接受一个“模糊模型”来代表现实。In itself, it would not embody anything unclear or contradictory. There is a difference between a shaky or out-of-focus photograph and a snapshot of clouds and fog banks.
Here's his argument:
- Quantum mechanics claims subatomic particles can be in a "blurred" indeterminate state
- If that's the case, create a scenario where subatomic bluriness determines the fate of a macroscopic object
- Because it's absurd for a macroscopic object to be "blurred" (right?), the subatomic particle can't truly be blurred
- Analogy: Just because a camera is out of focus doesn't mean things in the world are actually blurry
See, I don't know anything about QM. But I've read enough (2 paragraphs of his paper) to realize the majority of QM explanations miss Schrödinger's point.
Schrödinger's story is a critique of the idea of quantum blurriness. But, some pop sci author read the story, thought it was meant to be interpreted literally ("Large felines can exhibit quantum blurriness") and countless others retell the explanation, not the story. It's like hearing that the Emperor's New Clothes is about the eye-opening power of fashion without reading the tale yourself.
Now, we all misunderstand things. But, let's try to misunderstand thesource materialand not a retelling. Would you trust a book review from someone who only read other reviews?
在我们理解了原来的论点之后，我们就可以辩论批评是否有意义。If particles appear to be blurry at a quantum level, then perhaps:
- 我们只是缺乏信息。也许有一些隐藏的变量能说明我们所处的状态。(ButBell's theoremseems to rule that out.)
- Both events happened, but we don't know which alternate universe we're in. Maybe every possible outcome creates a new timeline. (I flip a coin and put it under my hand. Are we in a spooky quantum state?)
- 也许在我们检查之前，周围的环境本身就在“观察”猫，并让它进入一种稳定的状态。
- Or maybe the world is truly blurry until observers come along ("Copenhagen interpretation")
The story continues, as Einstein later wrote to Schrödinger:
除了劳厄之外，你是唯一一个认为只要诚实，就无法回避现实假设的当代物理学家。他们中的大多数人根本没有意识到他们在和现实玩什么样的冒险游戏——现实是独立于实验建立的东西的。Their interpretation is, however, refuted most elegantly通过你的放射性原子系统+放大器+火药电荷+盒子里的猫，其中系统的psi功能包含猫活着和被炸成碎片。Nobody really doubts that the presence or absence of the cat is something independent of the act of observation.
Einstein thought Schrödinger refuted the notion that reality was "blurry" and depended on the observer. The universe has already worked out what happened before you looked (hence his famous quote, "God does not play dice.").
Again, I don't claim to know anything about quantum mechanics. This about reading the source text and recognizing that the Schrödinger's Cat was used as areductio ad absurdum, and is not what Schrödinger believed.
从哲学上讲，这个问题让我想起了我们如何看待无限小的量。无穷小存在吗?
- No: There's no such things as "infinitely small" things -- things are there, or not there. But they may be too small for you to detect.
- Yes: There are fuzzy "infinitely small" quantities that blip away to 0 when we measure them, but are non-zero in their own world. These tiny quantities can interact with each other and can predict how our "macroscopic" numbers behave.
What is the crossover point between undetectable and detectable, blurry and certain? When does quantum behavior disappear in favor of the everyday, macroscopic reality we're used to? Can we "chain together" reality so tiny behaviors determine larger ones? That's the direct question Schrödinger's Cat raises.
元教训是，虽然类比是令人难忘的，但我们需要不时地用原始材料来理智地检查它们。在一层层的复述之后，我们可能会错过最初的意思，所以让我们保持开放的心态，纠正我们的理解。
快乐数学。
References
Wikipedia Article on Schrödinger's Cat- Wikipedia is difficult to learn things from, but has great lists of references
Current Google Definition- Note it doesn't say the argument was meant as acriticismagainst quantum mechanics
埃隆·马斯克:“阅读原始材料比阅读别人对原始材料的看法更好。”
