- #1
jason_m
- 18
- 0
onsider the following link:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_explosion
Now, consider Schrodinger's Cat. Does this not imply the following statements?
- A) The cat is alive before the box is opened.
- B) The cat is not alive before the box is opened.
Aren't both of these statements supposedly true?
Now, consider the following proof based on the principle of explosion:
1) The cat is not alive before the box is opened or Santa Claus exists. (From A))
2) The cat is alive.
3) Santa Claus exists (because 2) contradicts A) and 1) must be true - just like the Wikipedia link states).
Therefore, is the principle of explosion wrong or is something wrong with the notion of Schrodinger's Cat? (Or something else?)
Jason
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_explosion
Now, consider Schrodinger's Cat. Does this not imply the following statements?
- A) The cat is alive before the box is opened.
- B) The cat is not alive before the box is opened.
Aren't both of these statements supposedly true?
Now, consider the following proof based on the principle of explosion:
1) The cat is not alive before the box is opened or Santa Claus exists. (From A))
2) The cat is alive.
3) Santa Claus exists (because 2) contradicts A) and 1) must be true - just like the Wikipedia link states).
Therefore, is the principle of explosion wrong or is something wrong with the notion of Schrodinger's Cat? (Or something else?)
Jason
Last edited: