Skip to main content

Schrodinger's Cat is still Alive...and Dead

With Borders scaling back so many of their stores, I have ended up buying more books than I normally would.

One I picked up is "What is Life?" by Ed Regis.  It is a good short read, although it is now 2 years old, which is a long time given the rate that "artificial life" is moving at.  Since the book came out, Craig Ventor claims to have created the first artificial life.

One thing I did not know was that Schrodinger wrote a book with the same title in 1944 which predicted the existence of a DNA-like molecule;  Crick actually credits Schrodinger with inspiring some of his early work.

Ed Regis points out that Schrodinger's book never actually defines what life is; that is left hanging.  Interestingly, I felt the same about Regis's book.  While he argues that life is defined by having an "embedded metabolism" that argument still seems weak.  Carl Sagan pointed out, many years ago, that cars have a metabolism, which is hard to argue against.  Regis adds the "embedded" component to attempt to differentiate real life; the embedded component implying that the metabolism generates structures within the life form.  Where the argument is weak is in the (lack of) definition of structures; hybrid cars regenerate electricity on breaking - does this suffice?  Or, you can certainly imagine using the energy generated by the engine being used to produce a "structure," as well as giving the car acceleration.

So, according to Regis, and having done a little searching around the topic, one is left with a feeling that we still do not actually know how to tell if something is alive.  There is no definition of "life."

The conclusion is this:  When Schrodinger opens up the box to check if the cat is alive or dead....he still can't tell!  I wonder what this means to the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum physics?  Perhaps "the cat" is both alive and dead forever, but the uncertainty moves from the cat to the observer when the box is opened  :-)

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Echo vs Home

We love Alexa! We have had the Amazon Echo for well over a year.  Recently we also got a Google Home, to test it against our Alexa experience. The quick summary:  Interacting with Alexa is like interacting with a person.  Interacting with Home is like interacting with a computer.  Alexa is fun; Home is useful.  If you took away Alexa, I would be upset - I would be losing a friend.  If you took away Home, I wouldn't care too much.  It was very strange, but I actually felt like I might be offending Alexa when I purchased Home. Here are the two main differences: Wake-up words.  "Alexa" is friendly, easy to say, and evokes emotion.  Alex personifies the system - I am talking with someone.  "OK Google" is awkward, and constantly reminds you that you are talking to a machine - I am talking to something.  Of course, Google will update Home to allow us to customize the wake-up word, but the current out of box experience is less tha...

Gliese 581g

So...there is probably intelligent life out there.  As the old Monty Python saying goes, "I hope so, cause there certainly isn't much here on earth."  Case in point.  The video for Gliese581g is on MSNBC, and works fine in IE, but crashes in Chrome [ here ].