更改

'''Schrödinger's cat''' is a [[thought experiment]], sometimes described as a [[paradox]], devised by Austrian physicist [[Erwin Schrödinger]] in 1935, though the idea originated from [[Albert Einstein]].<ref name="Schrodinger1935">

'''Schrödinger's cat''' is a [[thought experiment]], sometimes described as a [[paradox]], devised by Austrian physicist [[Erwin Schrödinger]] in 1935, though the idea originated from [[Albert Einstein]].<ref name="Schrodinger1935"><br>

 

Schrödinger's cat is a thought experiment, sometimes described as a paradox, devised by Austrian physicist Erwin Schrödinger in 1935, though the idea originated from Albert Einstein.<ref name="Schrodinger1935"><br>

Schrödinger's cat is a thought experiment, sometimes described as a paradox, devised by Austrian physicist Erwin Schrödinger in 1935, though the idea originated from Albert Einstein.<ref name="Schrodinger1935"><br>

}}</ref> a state known as a [[quantum superposition]], as a result of being linked to a random [[Subatomic particle|subatomic]] event that may or may not occur.

}}</ref> a state known as a [[quantum superposition]], as a result of being linked to a random [[Subatomic particle|subatomic]] event that may or may not occur.

}}</ref> a state known as a quantum superposition, as a result of being linked to a random subatomic event that may or may not occur.<br>

}}</ref> a state known as a '''<font color="#fff8000">量子叠加quantum superposition</font>''', as a result of being linked to a random subatomic event that may or may not occur.<br>

一种被称为量子叠加的状态，是与可能或不可能发生的随机亚原子时间相联系的结果。

一种被称为量子叠加的状态，是与可能或不可能发生的随机亚原子时间相联系的结果。

The thought experiment is also often featured in theoretical discussions of the interpretations of quantum mechanics, particularly in situations involving the measurement problem. Schrödinger coined the term Verschränkung (entanglement) in the course of developing the thought experiment.

The thought experiment is also often featured in theoretical discussions of the interpretations of quantum mechanics, particularly in situations involving the measurement problem. Schrödinger coined the term Verschränkung (entanglement) in the course of developing the thought experiment.

Schrödinger intended his thought experiment as a discussion of the EPR article—named after its authors Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen—in 1935. The EPR article highlighted the counterintuitive nature of quantum superpositions, in which a quantum system such as an atom or photon can exist as a combination of multiple states corresponding to different possible outcomes.

Schrödinger intended his thought experiment as a discussion of the EPR article—named after its authors Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen—in 1935. The EPR article highlighted the counterintuitive nature of quantum superpositions, in which a quantum system such as an atom or photon can exist as a combination of multiple states corresponding to different possible outcomes.

薛定谔打算把他的思维实验作为对 EPR 文章（以其作者爱因斯坦、波多尔斯基和罗森的名字命名）的讨论在1935年进行了讨论。EPR文章强调了量子叠加的反直觉性质，在量子叠加中，一个量子系统，比如原子或者光子，可以作为对应不同可能结果的多个状态的组合而存在。

薛定谔打算把他的思维实验作为对'''<font color="#fff8000">电子顺磁共振EPR</font>'''文章（以其作者爱因斯坦、波多尔斯基和罗森的名字命名）的讨论在1935年进行了讨论。EPR文章强调了量子叠加的反直觉性质，在量子叠加中，一个量子系统，比如原子或者光子，可以作为对应不同可能结果的多个状态的组合而存在。

However, since Schrödinger's time, other interpretations of the mathematics of quantum mechanics have been advanced by physicists, some of which regard the "alive and dead" cat superposition as quite real.    Intended as a critique of the Copenhagen interpretation (the prevailing orthodoxy in 1935), the Schrödinger's cat thought experiment remains a defining touchstone for modern interpretations of quantum mechanics. Physicists often use the way each interpretation deals with Schrödinger's cat as a way of illustrating and comparing the particular features, strengths, and weaknesses of each interpretation.

However, since Schrödinger's time, other interpretations of the mathematics of quantum mechanics have been advanced by physicists, some of which regard the "alive and dead" cat superposition as quite real.    Intended as a critique of the Copenhagen interpretation (the prevailing orthodoxy in 1935), the Schrödinger's cat thought experiment remains a defining touchstone for modern interpretations of quantum mechanics. Physicists often use the way each interpretation deals with Schrödinger's cat as a way of illustrating and comparing the particular features, strengths, and weaknesses of each interpretation.

但是，自从薛定谔时代以来，物理学家对量子力学数学进行了其他解释，其中一些解释认为“活死”的猫叠加是十分真实的。作为对哥本哈根诠释的批判(1935年盛行的正统观念) ，薛定谔的猫思维实验仍然是现代量子力学诠释的决定性的试金石。物理学家经常使用每种解释处理薛定谔猫的方式来说明和比较每种解释的特点、优缺点。

但是，自从薛定谔时代以来，物理学家对’’’<font color=”#fff8000”>量子力学数学mathematics of quantum mechanics</font>’’’进行了其他解释，其中一些解释认为“活死”的猫叠加是十分真实的。作为对哥本哈根诠释的批判(1935年盛行的正统观念) ，薛定谔的猫思维实验仍然是现代量子力学诠释的决定性的试金石。物理学家经常使用每种解释处理薛定谔猫的方式来说明和比较每种解释的特点、优缺点。

One can even set up quite 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): in a [[Geiger counter]], there is a tiny bit of radioactive substance, so small, that perhaps in the course of the hour one of the atoms decays, but also, with equal probability, perhaps none; if it happens, the counter tube discharges and through a relay releases a hammer that shatters a small flask of [[hydrocyanic acid]]. If one has left this entire system to itself for an hour, one would say that the cat still lives if meanwhile no atom has [[radioactive decay|decayed]]. The first atomic decay would have poisoned it. The [[wave function|psi-function]] of the entire system would express this by having in it the living and dead cat (pardon the expression) mixed or smeared out in equal parts.

One can even set up quite 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): in a [[Geiger counter]], there is a tiny bit of radioactive substance, so small, that perhaps in the course of the hour one of the atoms decays, but also, with equal probability, perhaps none; if it happens, the counter tube discharges and through a relay releases a hammer that shatters a small flask of [[hydrocyanic acid]]. If one has left this entire system to itself for an hour, one would say that the cat still lives if meanwhile no atom has [[radioactive decay|decayed]]. The first atomic decay would have poisoned it. The [[wave function|psi-function]] of the entire system would express this by having in it the living and dead cat (pardon the expression) mixed or smeared out in equal parts.

One can even set up quite 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): in a Geiger counter, there is a tiny bit of radioactive substance, so small, that perhaps in the course of the hour one of the atoms decays, but also, with equal probability, perhaps none; if it happens, the counter tube discharges and through a relay releases a hammer that shatters a small flask of hydrocyanic acid. If one has left this entire system to itself for an hour, one would say that the cat still lives if meanwhile no atom has decayed. The first atomic decay would have poisoned it. The psi-function of the entire system would express this by having in it the living and dead cat (pardon the expression) mixed or smeared out in equal parts.

'''<font color="#32CD32">One can even set up quite ridiculous cases.</font>''' A cat is penned up in a steel chamber, along with the following device (which must be secured against direct interference by the cat): in a Geiger counter, there is a tiny bit of radioactive substance, so small, that perhaps in the course of the hour one of the atoms decays, but also, with equal probability, perhaps none; if it happens, the counter tube discharges and through a relay releases a hammer that shatters a small flask of hydrocyanic acid. If one has left this entire system to itself for an hour, one would say that the cat still lives if meanwhile no atom has decayed. The first atomic decay would have poisoned it. '''<font color="#32CD32">The psi-function of the entire system would express this by having in it the living and dead cat (pardon the expression) mixed or smeared out in equal parts.</font>'''

人们甚至可以提出非常荒谬的案例。将猫与下面的设备（必须固定以防止猫直接干扰）一起放在钢制的房间里：在盖革计数器中，有一小块放射性物质，非常小，也许在一个小时的过程中，其中一个原子会衰变，但是，也有相同的概率，也许不会发生衰变; 如果发生这种情况，计数管放电，并通过一个继电器释放一个锤子，锤子会打碎一小瓶氢氰酸。如果一个人把整个系统留给自己一个小时，就会说，如果没有原子衰变，这只猫就还活着。如果第一次原子衰变会使它中毒。整个系统的 psi 功能可以通过将活猫和死猫(对等表达)两个状态的叠加来表达这一点。

'''<font color="#32CD32">人们甚至可以提出非常荒谬的案例。</font>'''将猫与下面的设备（必须固定以防止猫直接干扰）一起放在钢制的房间里：在盖革计数器中，有一小块放射性物质，非常小，也许在一个小时的过程中，其中一个原子会衰变，但是，也有相同的概率，也许不会发生衰变; 如果发生这种情况，计数管放电，并通过一个继电器释放一个锤子，锤子会打碎一小瓶氢氰酸。如果一个人把整个系统留给自己一个小时，就会说，如果没有原子衰变，这只猫就还活着。如果第一次原子衰变会使它中毒。'''<font color="#32CD32">整个系统的 psi 功能可以通过将活猫和死猫(对等表达)两个状态的叠加来表达这一点。</font>'''

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. That prevents us from so naïvely accepting as valid a "blurred model" for representing reality. 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.}}

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. That prevents us from so naïvely accepting as valid a "blurred model" for representing reality. 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.}}

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. That prevents us from so naïvely accepting as valid a "blurred model" for representing reality. 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.}}

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. That prevents us from so naïvely accepting as valid a "blurred model" for representing reality. In itself, it would not embody anything unclear or contradictory. '''<font color="#32CD32">There is a difference between a shaky or out-of-focus photograph and a snapshot of clouds and fog banks.}}</font>'''

{{Quote|You are the only contemporary physicist, besides [[Max von Laue|Laue]], who sees that one cannot get around the assumption of reality, if only one is honest. Most of them simply do not see what sort of risky game they are playing with reality—reality as something independent of what is experimentally established. Their interpretation is, however, refuted most elegantly by your system of radioactive atom + amplifier + charge of gun powder + cat in a box, in which the psi-function of the system contains both the cat alive and blown to bits. Nobody really doubts that the presence or absence of the cat is something independent of the act of observation.<ref>{{cite journal|title=Induction and Scientific Realism: Einstein versus van Fraassen Part Three: Einstein, Aim-Oriented Empiricism and the Discovery of Special and General Relativity|first=Nicholas|last=Maxwell|date=1 January 1993|volume=44|issue=2|pages=275–305|doi=10.1093/bjps/44.2.275|jstor=687649|journal=The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science}}</ref>}}<br>

{{Quote|You are the only contemporary physicist, besides [[Max von Laue|Laue]], who sees that one cannot get around the assumption of reality, if only one is honest. Most of them simply do not see what sort of risky game they are playing with reality—reality as something independent of what is experimentally established. Their interpretation is, however, refuted most elegantly by your system of radioactive atom + amplifier + charge of gun powder + cat in a box, in which the psi-function of the system contains both the cat alive and blown to bits. Nobody really doubts that the presence or absence of the cat is something independent of the act of observation.<ref>{{cite journal|title=Induction and Scientific Realism: Einstein versus van Fraassen Part Three: Einstein, Aim-Oriented Empiricism and the Discovery of Special and General Relativity|first=Nicholas|last=Maxwell|date=1 January 1993|volume=44|issue=2|pages=275–305|doi=10.1093/bjps/44.2.275|jstor=687649|journal=The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science}}</ref>}}<br>

除了劳厄之外，您是唯一的当代物理学家，他发现只有诚实的人才能绕开对现实的假设。他们中的大多数人根本不知道他们在玩什么样的冒险游戏-现实是独立于实验建立的东西。。但是，他们的解释被你的系统——放射性原子+放大器+火药电荷+盒子里的猫——优雅地驳斥了，在这个系统里，psi功能既包含活的猫，也包含被炸成碎片的猫。没有人真的怀疑猫的存在或不存在与观察行为无关。<br>

除了劳厄之外，您是唯一的当代物理学家，他发现只有诚实的人才能绕开对现实的假设。他们中的大多数人根本不知道他们在玩什么样的冒险游戏-现实是独立于实验建立的东西。但是，他们的解释被你的系统——放射性原子+放大器+火药电荷+盒子里的猫——优雅地驳斥了，在这个系统里，psi功能既包含活的猫，也包含被炸成碎片的猫。没有人真的怀疑猫的存在或不存在与观察行为无关。<br>

Note that the charge of gunpowder is not mentioned in Schrödinger's setup, which uses a Geiger counter as an amplifier and hydrocyanic poison instead of gunpowder. The gunpowder had been mentioned in Einstein's original suggestion to Schrödinger 15 years before, and Einstein carried it forward to the present discussion.

Note that the charge of gunpowder is not mentioned in Schrödinger's setup, which uses a Geiger counter as an amplifier and hydrocyanic poison instead of gunpowder. The gunpowder had been mentioned in Einstein's original suggestion to Schrödinger 15 years before, and Einstein carried it forward to the present discussion.

However, one of the main scientists associated with the Copenhagen interpretation, [[Niels Bohr]], never had in mind the observer-induced collapse of the wave function, as he did not regard the wave function as physically real, but a statistical tool; thus, Schrödinger's cat did not pose any riddle to him. The cat would be either dead or alive long before the box is opened by a conscious [[Observer (quantum physics)|observer]].<ref name='Faye2008'>{{cite web | url = http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/qm-copenhagen/ | title = Copenhagen Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics | accessdate = 2010-09-19 | last = Faye | first = J | date = 2008-01-24 | encyclopedia = [[Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy]] | publisher = The Metaphysics Research Lab Center for the Study of Language and Information, [[Stanford University]]}}</ref> Analysis of an actual experiment found that measurement alone (for example by a Geiger counter) is sufficient to collapse a quantum wave function before there is any conscious observation of the measurement,<ref name='Carpenter2006'>{{cite journal | title = The death of Schroedinger's cat and of consciousness-based wave-function collapse | journal = [[Annales de la Fondation Louis de Broglie]] | year = 2006 | author = Carpenter RHS, Anderson AJ | volume = 31 | issue = 1 | pages = 45–52| id = | url = http://www.ensmp.fr/aflb/AFLB-311/aflb311m387.pdf  | accessdate = 2010-09-10 |archiveurl = https://web.archive.org/web/20061130173850/http://www.ensmp.fr/aflb/AFLB-311/aflb311m387.pdf |archivedate = 2006-11-30}}</ref> although the validity of their design is disputed.<ref name='Okon2006'>{{cite journal | title = How to Back up or Refute Quantum Theories of Consciousness | journal = Mind and Matter | year = 2016 | author = Okón E, Sebastián MA | volume = 14 | issue = 1 | pages = 25–49}}</ref> (The view that the "observation" is taken when a particle from the nucleus hits the detector can be developed into [[objective collapse theories]]. The thought experiment requires an "unconscious observation" by the detector in order for waveform collapse to occur. In contrast, the [[many worlds]] approach denies that collapse ever occurs.)

However, one of the main scientists associated with the Copenhagen interpretation, [[Niels Bohr]], never had in mind the observer-induced collapse of the wave function, as he did not regard the wave function as physically real, but a statistical tool; thus, Schrödinger's cat did not pose any riddle to him. The cat would be either dead or alive long before the box is opened by a conscious [[Observer (quantum physics)|observer]].<ref name='Faye2008'>{{cite web | url = http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/qm-copenhagen/ | title = Copenhagen Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics | accessdate = 2010-09-19 | last = Faye | first = J | date = 2008-01-24 | encyclopedia = [[Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy]] | publisher = The Metaphysics Research Lab Center for the Study of Language and Information, [[Stanford University]]}}</ref> Analysis of an actual experiment found that measurement alone (for example by a Geiger counter) is sufficient to collapse a quantum wave function before there is any conscious observation of the measurement,<ref name='Carpenter2006'>{{cite journal | title = The death of Schroedinger's cat and of consciousness-based wave-function collapse | journal = [[Annales de la Fondation Louis de Broglie]] | year = 2006 | author = Carpenter RHS, Anderson AJ | volume = 31 | issue = 1 | pages = 45–52| id = | url = http://www.ensmp.fr/aflb/AFLB-311/aflb311m387.pdf  | accessdate = 2010-09-10 |archiveurl = https://web.archive.org/web/20061130173850/http://www.ensmp.fr/aflb/AFLB-311/aflb311m387.pdf |archivedate = 2006-11-30}}</ref> although the validity of their design is disputed.<ref name='Okon2006'>{{cite journal | title = How to Back up or Refute Quantum Theories of Consciousness | journal = Mind and Matter | year = 2016 | author = Okón E, Sebastián MA | volume = 14 | issue = 1 | pages = 25–49}}</ref> (The view that the "observation" is taken when a particle from the nucleus hits the detector can be developed into [[objective collapse theories]]. The thought experiment requires an "unconscious observation" by the detector in order for waveform collapse to occur. In contrast, the [[many worlds]] approach denies that collapse ever occurs.)

However, one of the main scientists associated with the Copenhagen interpretation, Niels Bohr, never had in mind the observer-induced collapse of the wave function, as he did not regard the wave function as physically real, but a statistical tool; thus, Schrödinger's cat did not pose any riddle to him. The cat would be either dead or alive long before the box is opened by a conscious observer. Analysis of an actual experiment found that measurement alone (for example by a Geiger counter) is sufficient to collapse a quantum wave function before there is any conscious observation of the measurement, although the validity of their design is disputed. (The view that the "observation" is taken when a particle from the nucleus hits the detector can be developed into objective collapse theories. The thought experiment requires an "unconscious observation" by the detector in order for waveform collapse to occur. In contrast, the many worlds approach denies that collapse ever occurs.)

However, one of the main scientists associated with the Copenhagen interpretation, Niels Bohr, never had in mind the observer-induced collapse of the wave function, as he did not regard the wave function as physically real, but a statistical tool; thus, Schrödinger's cat did not pose any riddle to him. The cat would be either dead or alive long before the box is opened by a conscious observer. Analysis of an actual experiment found that measurement alone (for example by a Geiger counter) is sufficient to collapse a quantum wave function before there is any conscious observation of the measurement, although the validity of their design is disputed. (The view that the "observation" is taken when a particle from the nucleus hits the detector can be developed into objective collapse theories. The thought experiment requires an "unconscious observation" by the detector in order for waveform collapse to occur. In contrast, ’’’<font color=”#32CD32”>the many worlds approach </font>’’’denies that collapse ever occurs.)

然而，与哥本哈根诠释相关的主要科学家之一尼尔斯·玻尔从未想过观察者引起的波函数的坍缩，因为他并不认为波函数在物理上是真实的，而是一个统计工具;。因此，薛定谔的猫对他不构成困扰。早在盒子被有意识的观察者打开之前，猫就已经死了或者还活着。对实际实验的分析发现，单靠测量(例如使用盖革计数器)就足以在有意识地观察测量之前使量子波函数坍缩，尽管其设计的有效性尚有争议。(原子核中的粒子撞击探测器时进行“观测”的观点，可以发展为客观塌缩理论。思维实验需要探测器进行“无意识的观察” ，以便发生波形坍缩。相比之下，多世界的方法否认崩坍缩的发生。)

然而，与哥本哈根诠释相关的主要科学家之一尼尔斯·玻尔从未想过观察者引起的波函数的坍缩，因为他并不认为波函数在物理上是真实的，而是一个统计工具;。因此，薛定谔的猫对他不构成困扰。早在盒子被有意识的观察者打开之前，猫就已经死了或者还活着。对实际实验的分析发现，单靠测量(例如使用盖革计数器)就足以在有意识地观察测量之前使量子波函数坍缩，尽管其设计的有效性尚有争议。(原子核中的粒子撞击探测器时进行“观测”的观点，可以发展为客观塌缩理论。思维实验需要探测器进行“无意识的观察” ，以便发生波形坍缩。相比之下，’’’<font color=”#32CD32”>多世界诠释</font>’’’否认崩坍缩的发生。)

The quantum-mechanical "Schrödinger's cat" paradox according to the many-worlds interpretation. In this interpretation, every event is a branch point. The cat is both alive and dead—regardless of whether the box is opened—but the "alive" and "dead" cats are in different branches of the universe that are equally real but cannot interact with each other.

The quantum-mechanical "Schrödinger's cat" paradox according to the many-worlds interpretation. In this interpretation, every event is a branch point. The cat is both alive and dead—regardless of whether the box is opened—but the "alive" and "dead" cats are in different branches of the universe that are equally real but cannot interact with each other.

{{Main|Many-worlds interpretation}}

{{Main|Many-worlds interpretation}}

The ensemble interpretation states that superpositions are nothing but subensembles of a larger statistical ensemble. The state vector would not apply to individual cat experiments, but only to the statistics of many similarly prepared cat experiments. Proponents of this interpretation state that this makes the Schrödinger's cat paradox a trivial matter, or a non-issue.

The ensemble interpretation states that superpositions are nothing but subensembles of a larger statistical ensemble. The state vector would not apply to individual cat experiments, but only to the statistics of many similarly prepared cat experiments. Proponents of this interpretation state that this makes the Schrödinger's cat paradox a trivial matter, or a non-issue.

The relational interpretation makes no fundamental distinction between the human experimenter, the cat, or the apparatus, or between animate and inanimate systems; all are quantum systems governed by the same rules of wavefunction evolution, and all may be considered "observers". But the relational interpretation allows that different observers can give different accounts of the same series of events, depending on the information they have about the system. The cat can be considered an observer of the apparatus; meanwhile, the experimenter can be considered another observer of the system in the box (the cat plus the apparatus). Before the box is opened, the cat, by nature of its being alive or dead, has information about the state of the apparatus (the atom has either decayed or not decayed); but the experimenter does not have information about the state of the box contents. In this way, the two observers simultaneously have different accounts of the situation: To the cat, the wavefunction of the apparatus has appeared to "collapse"; to the experimenter, the contents of the box appear to be in superposition. Not until the box is opened, and both observers have the same information about what happened, do both system states appear to "collapse" into the same definite result, a cat that is either alive or dead.

The relational interpretation makes no fundamental distinction between the human experimenter, the cat, or the apparatus, or between animate and inanimate systems; all are quantum systems governed by the same rules of wavefunction evolution, and all may be considered "observers". But the relational interpretation allows that different observers can give different accounts of the same series of events, depending on the information they have about the system. The cat can be considered an observer of the apparatus; meanwhile, the experimenter can be considered another observer of the system in the box (the cat plus the apparatus). Before the box is opened, the cat, by nature of its being alive or dead, has information about the state of the apparatus (the atom has either decayed or not decayed); but the experimenter does not have information about the state of the box contents. In this way, the two observers simultaneously have different accounts of the situation: To the cat, the wavefunction of the apparatus has appeared to "collapse"; to the experimenter, the contents of the box appear to be in superposition. Not until the box is opened, and both observers have the same information about what happened, do both system states appear to "collapse" into the same definite result, a cat that is either alive or dead.

关系诠释并没有从根本上区分人类实验者、猫或仪器，或者有生命的和无生命的系统; 所有这些都是受同样的波函数进化规则支配的量子系统，所有这些都可以被认为是“观察者”。但是关系诠释允许不同的观察者根据他们所掌握的关于系统的信息，对同一系列事件给出不同的解释。猫可以被认为是仪器的观察者; 同时，实验者可以被认为是盒子中系统的另一个观察者(猫和仪器)。在盒子被打开之前，猫是活着还是死了，有关于设备状态的信息(原子要么衰变了，要么没有衰变) ; 但是实验人员没有关于盒子内容状态的信息。这样，两个观察者同时对这种情况有不同的解释: 对猫来说，仪器的波函数似乎是“塌缩”的; 对实验者来说，盒子里的东西似乎是叠加的。直到盒子被打开，并且两个观察者对所发生的事情有了相同的信息，两个系统状态才似乎“坍缩”成为同一个确定的结果，一只猫不是活着就是死了。

’’’<font color=”#fff8000”>关系诠释relational interpretation</font>’’’并没有从根本上区分人类实验者、猫或仪器，或者有生命的和无生命的系统; 所有这些都是受同样的波函数进化规则支配的量子系统，所有这些都可以被认为是“观察者”。但是关系诠释允许不同的观察者根据他们所掌握的关于系统的信息，对同一系列事件给出不同的解释。猫可以被认为是仪器的观察者; 同时，实验者可以被认为是盒子中系统的另一个观察者(猫和仪器)。在盒子被打开之前，猫是活着还是死了，有关于设备状态的信息(原子要么衰变了，要么没有衰变) ; 但是实验人员没有关于盒子内容状态的信息。这样，两个观察者同时对这种情况有不同的解释: 对猫来说，仪器的波函数似乎是“塌缩”的; 对实验者来说，盒子里的东西似乎是叠加的。直到盒子被打开，并且两个观察者对所发生的事情有了相同的信息，两个系统状态才似乎“坍缩”成为同一个确定的结果，一只猫不是活着就是死了。

In the transactional interpretation the apparatus emits an advanced wave backward in time, which combined with the wave that the source emits forward in time, forms a standing wave.  The waves are seen as physically real, and the apparatus is considered an "observer".  In the transactional interpretation, the collapse of the wavefunction is "atemporal" and occurs along the whole transaction between the source and the apparatus.  The cat is never in superposition.  Rather the cat is only in one state at any particular time, regardless of when the human experimenter looks in the box.  The transactional interpretation resolves this quantum paradox.

In the transactional interpretation the apparatus emits an advanced wave backward in time, which combined with the wave that the source emits forward in time, forms a standing wave.  The waves are seen as physically real, and the apparatus is considered an "observer".  In the transactional interpretation, the collapse of the wavefunction is "atemporal" and occurs along the whole transaction between the source and the apparatus.  The cat is never in superposition.  Rather the cat is only in one state at any particular time, regardless of when the human experimenter looks in the box.  The transactional interpretation resolves this quantum paradox.

The Zeno effect is known to cause delays to any changes from the initial state.

The Zeno effect is known to cause delays to any changes from the initial state.

According to objective collapse theories, superpositions are destroyed spontaneously (irrespective of external observation), when some objective physical threshold (of time, mass, temperature, irreversibility, etc.) is reached. Thus, the cat would be expected to have settled into a definite state long before the box is opened. This could loosely be phrased as "the cat observes itself", or "the environment observes the cat".

According to objective collapse theories, superpositions are destroyed spontaneously (irrespective of external observation), when some objective physical threshold (of time, mass, temperature, irreversibility, etc.) is reached. Thus, the cat would be expected to have settled into a definite state long before the box is opened. This could loosely be phrased as "the cat observes itself", or "the environment observes the cat".

根据客观塌缩理论，当达到某种客观物理阈值(时间、质量、温度、不可逆性等)时，叠加会自发地被破坏(与外部观察无关)。因此，猫应该在盒子打开之前很久就已经进入了一个确定的状态。这可以不严谨地表述为“猫自己观察自己” ，或者“环境观察猫”。

根据’’’<font color=”#fff8000”>客观塌缩理论objective collapse theories</font>’’’，当达到某种客观物理阈值(时间、质量、温度、不可逆性等)时，叠加会自发地被破坏(与外部观察无关)。因此，猫应该在盒子打开之前很久就已经进入了一个确定的状态。这可以不严谨地表述为“猫自己观察自己” ，或者“环境观察猫”。

The experiment as described is a purely theoretical one, and the machine proposed is not known to have been constructed. However, successful experiments involving similar principles, e.g. superpositions of relatively large (by the standards of quantum physics) objects have been performed. These experiments do not show that a cat-sized object can be superposed, but the known upper limit on "cat states" has been pushed upwards by them. In many cases the state is short-lived, even when cooled to near absolute zero.

The experiment as described is a purely theoretical one, and the machine proposed is not known to have been constructed. However, successful experiments involving similar principles, e.g. superpositions of relatively large (by the standards of quantum physics) objects have been performed. These experiments do not show that a cat-sized object can be superposed, but the known upper limit on "cat states" has been pushed upwards by them. In many cases the state is short-lived, even when cooled to near absolute zero.

所描述的实验是纯理论性的实验，所提出的机器尚未被构造出来，但是已经进行了涉及类似原理的成功试验，例如:。相对较大的物体(按量子物理学的标准)的叠加已经完成。这些实验并没有表明可以将猫大小的物体叠加，但是已知的“猫态”的上限已经被它们向上推了。在许多情况下，即使冷却到接近绝对零度，这种状态也是短暂的。

所描述的实验是纯理论性的实验，所提出的机器尚未被构造出来，但是已经进行了涉及类似原理的成功试验，例如:。相对较大的物体(按量子物理学的标准)的叠加已经完成。这些实验并没有表明可以将猫大小的物体叠加，但是已知的“猫状态”的上限已经被它们向上推了。在许多情况下，即使冷却到接近绝对零度，这种状态也是短暂的。

* A "cat state" has been achieved with photons.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.science20.com/news_articles/schr%C3%B6dingers_cat_now_made_light|title=Schrödinger's Cat Now Made Of Light|date=27 August 2014|website=www.science20.com|url-status=live|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20120318091956/http://www.science20.com/news_articles/schr%C3%B6dingers_cat_now_made_light|archivedate=18 March 2012}}</ref><br>

* A "cat state" has been achieved with photons.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.science20.com/news_articles/schr%C3%B6dingers_cat_now_made_light|title=Schrödinger's Cat Now Made Of Light|date=27 August 2014|website=www.science20.com|url-status=live|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20120318091956/http://www.science20.com/news_articles/schr%C3%B6dingers_cat_now_made_light|archivedate=18 March 2012}}</ref><br>