Rockin' in the free world since 2005.

[Total: 57    Average: 3.9/5]
89 Comments - View/Add
Hits: 21251
Rating: 3.9
Category: Science
Date: 03/08/11 02:11 PM

89 Responses to Schrodinger`s Cat Explained?

  1. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    31799 posts
    March 8, 2011 at 2:13 pm
    Link: Schrodinger`s Cat Explained? - Schrodinger`s cat is an icon of modern physics - but what is it exactly? Hooray for cats and thought experiments.
  2. Profile photo of wingzero0721
    wingzero0721 Male 30-39
    12 posts
    March 8, 2011 at 2:20 pm
    nice hair dude
  3. Profile photo of Smashking
    Smashking Male 18-29
    773 posts
    March 8, 2011 at 2:28 pm
    Another way to think of it: If a tree falls in the forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?

    Based on quantum physics, it both makes a sound and doesn`t make a sound. The only way to define it is if someone or something can observe it.
  4. Profile photo of gothmo
    gothmo Female 18-29
    1324 posts
    March 8, 2011 at 2:29 pm
    I love Schrodinger`s cat :) my physics teacher used it as an example when we were talking about light and the particle/wave idea and a lot of science fictiony books I read used it to explain the quantum mechanics they were trying to explain. it`s quite simple really...
  5. Profile photo of jacobsona29
    jacobsona29 Female 18-29
    233 posts
    March 8, 2011 at 2:33 pm
    Nerdgasm :D
  6. Profile photo of lilbroder
    lilbroder Male 18-29
    86 posts
    March 8, 2011 at 2:38 pm
    I think the main dude`s hair makes the video
  7. Profile photo of almightybob1
    almightybob1 Male 18-29
    4290 posts
    March 8, 2011 at 2:43 pm
    Another way to think of it: If a tree falls in the forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?
    Yes, it makes a sound. Sound is just the propagation of pressure through air (or another medium - we can hear underwater too), which happens regardless of whether there is an ear nearby to interpret it.

    Quantum physics can change depending on observation. The rest of physics does not.
  8. Profile photo of Fatninja01
    Fatninja01 Male 30-39
    25408 posts
    March 8, 2011 at 2:45 pm
    i learned things
  9. Profile photo of Nick_13
    Nick_13 Male 30-39
    394 posts
    March 8, 2011 at 2:49 pm
    exactly almighty bob, yes it makes a sound, or more accurately, it emits a wave of energy which we as human beings detect as sound.

    Irrespective of whether a human being is there or not, it produces that wave of energy.

    I hate intellectuals trying to be clever for the sake of it.

    Let`s look at the cat situation - this is just stupid. You could say the same thing whether the cyanide was in there or not - just because from your point of view, you can`t tell if the cat is alive or not... that doesn`t actually decide whether it is!

    How about if I never send another message on iab from now on? Does that mean that to every iab reader, i am in a quantum state of being both alive and dead?

    Well I wonder how that will feel from my point of view.

    or even if it`s just in the amount of time between this next message and my next one... am I both dead and alive at the same time?!

    I will have to call in sick and explain this all to
  10. Profile photo of tn11
    tn11 Male 18-29
    1587 posts
    March 8, 2011 at 2:49 pm
    What about quantum suicide? Shcrödinger is a gay physicist- he blows your mind. Get it? eh?
  11. Profile photo of Nick_13
    Nick_13 Male 30-39
    394 posts
    March 8, 2011 at 2:53 pm
    my supervisor. (dunno why it chopped my message, i was below the 1000 limit)

    oh wait, maybe it`s another quantum mechanical question... just because I believed the text in the box to be less than 1000 characters, I need to put some deadly gas in here too to help me figure it out.

    *mustard gas*
  12. Profile photo of TheSharpest
    TheSharpest Male 18-29
    1768 posts
    March 8, 2011 at 2:54 pm
    Yeah Nick, I hate people trying to be clever for the sake of it too but sound only exists as a neural interpretation of said waves so the answer would be no, there is no sound if a tree falls and no animal is there to hear it.
  13. Profile photo of LazyMe484
    LazyMe484 Male 18-29
    10443 posts
    March 8, 2011 at 2:59 pm
    I wish I looked like that guy in the black shirt. I`d have all the ladies.

    The key here is that the cat is alive AND dead at the same time. There was a few "alive or dead" quotes there. That`s not the case.
  14. Profile photo of Trypno
    Trypno Male 18-29
    474 posts
    March 8, 2011 at 3:00 pm
    Didn`t even have to watch the video, Shrodinger`s Cat/Box is one of my favorite physics/psychology ideas.
    It really is simple, if you put a cat in a box and close the box so that you can no longer perceive it, you have now way of knowing whether the cat is or is not in the box, or whether it is alive or dead, or some combination of all factors.
  15. Profile photo of Trypno
    Trypno Male 18-29
    474 posts
    March 8, 2011 at 3:02 pm
    But in all reality it really is just a goofy and completely hypothetical situation because everyone knows that if you put a live cat in a box, the cat is in fact alive, and is still in the box. Just because you can`t see it doesn`t mean it doesn`t exist in the state you last left it in.
  16. Profile photo of Nick_13
    Nick_13 Male 30-39
    394 posts
    March 8, 2011 at 3:03 pm
    TheSharpest, you need to read the rest of my post not just knee-jerk to the first 8 words.
  17. Profile photo of the_phantom
    the_phantom Male 18-29
    510 posts
    March 8, 2011 at 3:03 pm
    why do they even need a cat? why cant tehy just observe whther the glas has been broken and the glass can exist in two states?
  18. Profile photo of Nlupu
    Nlupu Male 18-29
    229 posts
    March 8, 2011 at 3:07 pm
    I LOVE HIS HAIR!!!
  19. Profile photo of simmerdown
    simmerdown Female 18-29
    62 posts
    March 8, 2011 at 3:13 pm
    I have never understood Schrodinger`s cat, and I still don`t. :(
    Someone explained it to me at a quantum level and that made a lot more sense. Does it just not work with cats, or was that the point they were making?
  20. Profile photo of TopperHey
    TopperHey Male 18-29
    1930 posts
    March 8, 2011 at 3:14 pm
    I`ve always thought that Shrodinger`s Cat meant absolutely nothing of any relevance, and I think this video has reassured my that it`s not meant to.
    Basicly it means "You don`t know something unless you observe it". Surely you can just say that, as it`s stating the bleeding obvious. I`m suprised something so fundamentally basic to logic is so popular.
  21. Profile photo of TopperHey
    TopperHey Male 18-29
    1930 posts
    March 8, 2011 at 3:16 pm
    @simmerdown: I think you`re in the same camp as me. On a normal level, it means absolutely nothing. The idea only applies on a quantum level, for which the cat is a completely useless analogy.
  22. Profile photo of smigbaafm
    smigbaafm Male 18-29
    648 posts
    March 8, 2011 at 3:23 pm
    I thought the Cat experiment was Schrodinger`s way of politely saying "That is bullpoo and let me tell you why" to the other physicists. Then he turned out to be wrong, how embarrassing.
  23. Profile photo of Gerry1of1
    Gerry1of1 Male 50-59
    36217 posts
    March 8, 2011 at 3:25 pm

    there are easier ways to kill a cat.
  24. Profile photo of almightybob1
    almightybob1 Male 18-29
    4290 posts
    March 8, 2011 at 3:27 pm
    Yeah Nick, I hate people trying to be clever for the sake of it too but sound only exists as a neural interpretation of said waves so the answer would be no, there is no sound if a tree falls and no animal is there to hear it.
    Not true. Sound is pressure waves. Those pressure waves are not dedicated by nature for the sole purpose of vibrating the bones in the ears of mammals.

    For example, sound waves can move things. So you could, for example, watch silent video of sound waves causing the surrounding leaves in the forest to move. Which proves the sound still happens, regardless of whether anyone can hear it.

    QED.

    The idea only applies on a quantum level, for which the cat is a completely useless analogy.
    Exactly. People need to remember that it is an analogy. The cat is not biologically both dead and alive at all times during the hour it is unobservable.
  25. Profile photo of Volsunga
    Volsunga Male 18-29
    1548 posts
    March 8, 2011 at 3:33 pm
    So they only talk about the Copenhagen interpretation because it is the most "mind-blowing" . In reality, it is just stupid because if we consider the cat an observer, then it obviously knows whether it is alive or not (or more accurately, whether the cyanide has been released). Schrodinger`s Cat actually does a poor job of explaining the concept of quantum indeterminacy. We now have an ACTUAL experiment that demonstrates the concept much easier and without all the problem of the cat`s thought experiment. The double-slit experiment is fairly easy to understand and reveals far more about what is actually going on. Schodinger`s cat is really only kept alive by pretentious idiots who think they understand quantum mechanics because they "know the profound fact that the cat is both dead and alive". It`s these misunderstandings that leave innocent people vulnerable to charlatans like Deepak Chopra.
  26. Profile photo of rogue_knight
    rogue_knight Male 40-49
    868 posts
    March 8, 2011 at 3:51 pm
    nice hair dude- stop trying to have Einstein crazy hair...
  27. Profile photo of fnkychkn
    fnkychkn Female 40-49
    855 posts
    March 8, 2011 at 4:14 pm
    Gee. I didn`t know Phil Spector was a scientist...
  28. Profile photo of xmbo
    xmbo Male 18-29
    47 posts
    March 8, 2011 at 4:14 pm
    i know seven ways to kill a cat, this is not one.
  29. Profile photo of Orpheon
    Orpheon Male 18-29
    70 posts
    March 8, 2011 at 4:36 pm
    I think Schrodinger`s cat is useful for explaining the basics of quantum indeterminacy to people who have no background in science. It also illustrates the strangeness of quantum physics, e.g. affecting particles by measuring them, finding things without looking for them, effects happening before causes, etc. I`m sure there are probably better and more accurate illustrations now, but it`s still usable.
  30. Profile photo of Spider_sol
    Spider_sol Male 18-29
    1452 posts
    March 8, 2011 at 4:52 pm
    Schrodinger`s Cat is a zombie!
  31. Profile photo of AGit
    AGit Male 30-39
    996 posts
    March 8, 2011 at 4:56 pm
    Not true. Sound is pressure waves. Those pressure waves are not dedicated by nature for the sole purpose of vibrating the bones in the ears of mammals.

    "For example, sound waves can move things. So you could, for example, watch silent video of sound waves causing the surrounding leaves in the forest to move. Which proves the sound still happens, regardless of whether anyone can hear it."
    Sorry to be picky, but if it`s a silent video there would be no way to prove that the sound caused the movement
  32. Profile photo of duffytoler
    duffytoler Male 40-49
    5196 posts
    March 8, 2011 at 5:06 pm
    This theory is 75 years old, very famous, and EVERYBODY`S ALREADY HEARD OF IT. Instead of re-hashing an re-re-rehashing the same old same old same old over and over and over, why not come up with a better theory? Physicists have been sitting on their collective asses for half a century now, the last real work was done in this field BEFORE I WAS BORN.
  33. Profile photo of MildCorma
    MildCorma Male 18-29
    496 posts
    March 8, 2011 at 5:09 pm
    Volsunga

    If people with no background in science were able to think "Wait! Why doesn`t the cat count as an observer?" then the experiment would have no point as clearly there would already be a fundamental understanding of quantum mechanics. It serves its purpose of being a relate-able example of quantum physics, which is why so many people think they understand. I do agree with you on the double slit experiment though.
  34. Profile photo of MildCorma
    MildCorma Male 18-29
    496 posts
    March 8, 2011 at 5:13 pm
    Also I find it hilarious how everyone on here -completely understands- quantum mechanics and dislikes those that "pretend" to know because they have heard about some cat in a box, but none of you are those people of course. ^^
  35. Profile photo of Angelmassb
    Angelmassb Male 18-29
    15511 posts
    March 8, 2011 at 5:25 pm
    Science is all wrong, they cant still proof the existence of that one being that is above all us, our silly theories and morals. I am talking of Zeus of course
  36. Profile photo of HOBOMOE
    HOBOMOE Male 18-29
    515 posts
    March 8, 2011 at 5:49 pm
    well perhaps he had a strong box.
  37. Profile photo of bacon_pie
    bacon_pie Male 30-39
    3061 posts
    March 8, 2011 at 6:00 pm
    i had the same conundrum when i put my dick in a box.
  38. Profile photo of almightybob1
    almightybob1 Male 18-29
    4290 posts
    March 8, 2011 at 6:07 pm
    Sorry to be picky, but if it`s a silent video there would be no way to prove that the sound caused the movement
    OK, yes, but you get the point. Sound waves cause movement, and it is experimentally verifiable.

    Sound is not just "that which is heard by animals". For starters, which animal?

    We have a far smaller hearing range than plenty of other animals, around 20Hz - 20kHz. But dogs can hear around 40Hz - 60kHz. So either we pick humans as the definition, meaning what dogs are hearing up there in the >20kHz range isn`t sound (absurd by this definition), or we take the dog range which means sound exists that we can`t hear (again, absurd when you`re defining sound as "that which is audible").

    The same logic process can be applied to any animal, which is why we don`t use this definition. Instead we define sound as the propagation of pressure waves through a medium. And that definition does not require an observer.
  39. Profile photo of D3rAnG3d
    D3rAnG3d Male 18-29
    1598 posts
    March 8, 2011 at 6:08 pm
    It took over 7 minutes to explain this...
  40. Profile photo of almightybob1
    almightybob1 Male 18-29
    4290 posts
    March 8, 2011 at 6:19 pm
    duffytoler: whatever makes you think quantum mechanics research stopped at Schrodinger`s Cat? Just because the laymen like us haven`t heard of stuff that`s happened since doesn`t mean they`ve been slacking.

    I would bet that more people have heard of the Rutherford model of the atom than the Bohr model. And probably even more people remember JJ Thompson`s "plum pudding" model than the Rutherford model, because it tends to stick in the brain with a name like that.

    Popular knowledge is, sadly, not an accurate measurement of current scientific knowledge.
  41. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    31799 posts
    March 8, 2011 at 6:35 pm
    why do they even need a cat? - the_phantom
    Everyone needs a cat! lolz! But really, because the cat cannot be "both alive and dead" at the same time, it`s either one or the other, never both. It might be that teeny-tiny bits of matter can exist in dual-realities, but not kitties.
  42. Profile photo of handys003
    handys003 Male 50-59
    2402 posts
    March 8, 2011 at 6:42 pm

    I have the answer.

  43. Profile photo of argenteus
    argenteus Male 18-29
    265 posts
    March 8, 2011 at 7:07 pm
    I didn`t hear a word the guy in the glasses was saying, I was too busy listening to his accent.
  44. Profile photo of MauserTM
    MauserTM Male 18-29
    1222 posts
    March 8, 2011 at 7:16 pm
    So basically, one thing is or isnt, and it doesnt depend on us looking at it.
  45. Profile photo of Morrigann
    Morrigann Male 18-29
    480 posts
    March 8, 2011 at 7:36 pm
    "I thought einstein was clever, but that`s a stupid Idea!"
    my favorite part of the video
  46. Profile photo of tesspot
    tesspot Female 18-29
    24 posts
    March 8, 2011 at 7:48 pm
    "...where he fathered an illegitimate child. But that has nothing to do with the cat."

    Or does it?
  47. Profile photo of c3rv4
    c3rv4 Male 18-29
    270 posts
    March 8, 2011 at 7:52 pm
    Whats up with his hair? xD
  48. Profile photo of Schr0dinger
    Schr0dinger Male 50-59
    359 posts
    March 8, 2011 at 7:58 pm
    "sound only exists as a neural interpretation of said waves."

    Dumbest post ever! I have taught HS kids that know better.

    "why cant tehy just observe whther the glas has been broken"

    The cat creates emotional bait and makes the experiment have a "sad" consequence. Oh and spellcheck is your friend...jesus.

    "We now have an ACTUAL experiment that demonstrates the concept much easier and without all the problem of the cat`s thought experiment."

    Yes several. Your point?

    "Instead of re-hashing an re-re-rehashing the same old same old same old over and over and over, why not come up with a better theory?"

    Agreed sir! Please mystify us all with your own EPOCH SHATTERING thought experiment that is almost 100 years ahead of its time. We`ll wait.

    "i had the same conundrum when i put my dick in a box."

    And there is the thread winner. (+5 internets) <
  49. Profile photo of YugureKage
    YugureKage Female 18-29
    1205 posts
    March 8, 2011 at 8:52 pm
    those hands are not his hands...beware the HANDS!
  50. Profile photo of fattpill
    fattpill Male 30-39
    255 posts
    March 8, 2011 at 9:11 pm
    @volsunga

    I think I know what you are talking about. on tv they discovered on the slit exp. then when the atoms were being observed it seemed like the (atoms?) actually responded to being viewed.
  51. Profile photo of fattpill
    fattpill Male 30-39
    255 posts
    March 8, 2011 at 9:11 pm
    Ohh and that dudes hands talking was atrocious. Its like they weren`t his hands
  52. Profile photo of MrYouKnow
    MrYouKnow Male 13-17
    1081 posts
    March 8, 2011 at 9:17 pm
    Epic hair.
  53. Profile photo of crackyhoss
    crackyhoss Male 18-29
    254 posts
    March 8, 2011 at 9:19 pm
    i gave this a 4 star rating just because of that dude`s afro.
  54. Profile photo of intrigid
    intrigid Male 18-29
    914 posts
    March 8, 2011 at 9:29 pm
    The Copenhagen interpretation is so 1929. MWI is where it`s at.
  55. Profile photo of EricWRN
    EricWRN Male 30-39
    590 posts
    March 8, 2011 at 9:42 pm
    "i thought einstein was clever, that`s a stupid idea!" - perfect ending
  56. Profile photo of AnImbroglio
    AnImbroglio Male 30-39
    838 posts
    March 8, 2011 at 9:48 pm
    For some reason, I read the title and thought that someone had managed to prove or disprove the cat dilemma. Disappointment much.
  57. Profile photo of evilducky00
    evilducky00 Male 18-29
    430 posts
    March 8, 2011 at 10:21 pm
    But the cat can observe if it is dead or alive.
  58. Profile photo of Darkhumour
    Darkhumour Male 18-29
    257 posts
    March 8, 2011 at 10:23 pm
    they have a youtube channel called sixty symbols, it`s pretty cool nottingham has a whole series of channels the crazy haired man is from the chemistry channel called periodic videos
  59. Profile photo of Magicant
    Magicant Female 18-29
    277 posts
    March 8, 2011 at 10:33 pm
    So it`s just a guy shutting cats in boxes and poisoning them. sick man
  60. Profile photo of SvampeBob
    SvampeBob Male 18-29
    3076 posts
    March 8, 2011 at 11:14 pm
    you could never make the sun disappear

  • Profile photo of Student_Law
    Student_Law Male 30-39
    1010 posts
    March 8, 2011 at 11:37 pm
    No matter what, Schrödiger explained the consept in a fabolous way. Even back then, lang before the internet, Schrödiger knew: cats: WINNING!
  • Profile photo of ficklexikon8
    ficklexikon8 Male 18-29
    16 posts
    March 8, 2011 at 11:44 pm
    This dude has awesome hair!

    btw, physisists must be horrible at grocery shopping. As soon as they place the groceries in the fridge and close the door, they`re like: oh poo! is it still in there? and then they have to buy some more.... just to be sure.

    Just another reason not to be a physisist, besides having to study physics and chemistry and that bullpoo...
  • Profile photo of GRadde
    GRadde Male 18-29
    2556 posts
    March 9, 2011 at 2:43 am
    Schroedinger: So, to summarize, I want to put a Mr. Whiskers in a box and spend one hour not knowing whether Mr. Whiskers has been reduced to pulp or not.
    Einstein: Hey, why not spend the same hour wondering whether Mr. Whiskers has been pulverised, letting his cat intestines plaster the walls, let cat blood cover every inch in the box`s inside space, and have tiny bits of cat skull and bones cover the floor of said box.

    Anyone but me think Einstein had a problem with cats?
  • Profile photo of Anshin
    Anshin Female 18-29
    127 posts
    March 9, 2011 at 3:08 am
    Everyday objects such as cats- lol :P
  • Profile photo of yagovaggo
    yagovaggo Male 30-39
    476 posts
    March 9, 2011 at 3:20 am
    Ok... This would be like.. if you put a murderer and a negotiator in a box.. will the negotiator talk his way out of being murdered, or will he be killed. You wont know until you open the box!!! This is soooo facsinating!!!
  • Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17515 posts
    March 9, 2011 at 4:01 am
    5cats It might be that teeny-tiny bits of matter can exist in dual-realities, but not kitties.

    Sure they can, with catnip!

    :-)
  • Profile photo of hatface
    hatface Male 18-29
    605 posts
    March 9, 2011 at 4:52 am
    Man, I love thought experiments.
  • Profile photo of antagonizer
    antagonizer Male 18-29
    509 posts
    March 9, 2011 at 6:08 am
    There are two observers in Schrodinger`s experiment, the cat and the detector.
  • Profile photo of yagovaggo
    yagovaggo Male 30-39
    476 posts
    March 9, 2011 at 6:19 am
    @ Schr0dinger - You should add yourself to your list!
  • Profile photo of BaconMaster
    BaconMaster Male 18-29
    14 posts
    March 9, 2011 at 6:28 am
    Thought experiment? The hell with that; how about a REAL experiment? I`ll take a box and put a goddam cat in it, then I`ll pulverize it with a 4-iron. I can conclude with 100% accuracy that the cat will be dead... an I will not even have to open the door on the box to find out.

    Cats = Suck
  • Profile photo of Pandabee
    Pandabee Female 40-49
    857 posts
    March 9, 2011 at 6:38 am
    Finally! I get it! I thought I was missing something, the whole point is that it`s not supposed to make sense. I got completely lost with the 2 slot test last week. I came to the conclusion that there must be two protons in the tube to start with. But the point is we can`t completely define quantum objects...there is a grey area.
  • Profile photo of inaria
    inaria Female 18-29
    1515 posts
    March 9, 2011 at 6:54 am
    Epic hair is epic and looks like pmarren is inhabiting BaconMaster`s soul
  • Profile photo of theend81
    theend81 Male 30-39
    92 posts
    March 9, 2011 at 6:55 am
    "...fled to the UK then to Dublin where he had quite a colorful career, and even fathered an illegitimate child; but that has nothing to do with his cat." Oh quite the contrary professor... I think that has EVERYTHING to do with a cat.
  • Profile photo of zombunny
    zombunny Female 18-29
    2525 posts
    March 9, 2011 at 7:10 am
    Are physicists required to have crazy mad scientist hair or is that just a popular look among them?
  • Profile photo of Burton_Ian
    Burton_Ian Male 18-29
    817 posts
    March 9, 2011 at 7:33 am
    Bunny, upon accepting a position as a theoretical physicist it is a term of their contract that they must have ridiculous hair.
  • Profile photo of gilmourw
    gilmourw Male 40-49
    38 posts
    March 9, 2011 at 7:56 am
    Here`s an easier experiment: Flip a coin, shoot the cat.
  • Profile photo of Naitsirhc88
    Naitsirhc88 Male 18-29
    391 posts
    March 9, 2011 at 9:30 am
    Quantum uncertainty hurts my brain
  • Profile photo of zombunny
    zombunny Female 18-29
    2525 posts
    March 9, 2011 at 9:30 am
    Thought so, Burton_Ian. Thanks for clearing that up.
  • Profile photo of ADRUNKHOBO
    ADRUNKHOBO Male 18-29
    295 posts
    March 9, 2011 at 9:55 am
    Yaaay physicists with funky hair are always awesome.
    Perhaps some day I will be a physicist with funky hair...
    I`ve always liked this experiment.
  • Profile photo of Quackor
    Quackor Male 18-29
    2856 posts
    March 9, 2011 at 10:30 am
    PETA should oppose this
  • Profile photo of Oystah
    Oystah Female 40-49
    4033 posts
    March 9, 2011 at 11:27 am
    If you could start with the cat alive or dead, why even put a cat in there in the first place? Did I hear that part wrong?
  • Profile photo of 8BitHero
    8BitHero Male 18-29
    5414 posts
    March 9, 2011 at 11:40 am
    I love this theory and to see `Prof` talking about this. Watch this channel often on YouTube.
  • Profile photo of Padiddle
    Padiddle Female 13-17
    192 posts
    March 9, 2011 at 1:26 pm
    "...then moved to dublin where he had a very colorful career, and even father an illegitimate child. But that has nothing to do with his cat."

    ...am I the only one who found this hilarious?
  • Profile photo of AngryYouth
    AngryYouth Male 18-29
    734 posts
    March 9, 2011 at 1:59 pm
    I can`t take him seriously, he needs to get a haircut.
  • Profile photo of espenfana
    espenfana Male 18-29
    21 posts
    March 9, 2011 at 4:37 pm
    The cat is a lie!
  • Profile photo of Swaywithme
    Swaywithme Female 18-29
    3696 posts
    March 10, 2011 at 2:12 am
    dammit, Sheldon explained this once on BBT so well, but I can`t rememmmbbeer..it onlu took 2 minutes, not 8. =(
  • Profile photo of realguitar
    realguitar Male 40-49
    18 posts
    March 10, 2011 at 11:39 pm
    If the cat goes in dead- the cat cannot gain the potential to be anything other than what it is- if live, the cat is a potentially dead cat. Potential DNE- the chicken came first- the egg is merely a potential chicken.
  • Profile photo of AlfishKK
    AlfishKK Female 18-29
    782 posts
    March 12, 2011 at 9:30 pm
    Yeah, my dad explained this to me when I was a child. What makes the thought experiment so cool is that it`s so easy to understand the concept of it, but it`s impossible to "solve."
  • Profile photo of deathxtra
    deathxtra Male 13-17
    2791 posts
    March 13, 2011 at 11:33 pm
    There`s another video on youtube that explains it better in a fraction of the time.
  • Leave a Reply