ChatGPT - Benchmark - Thought Experiments

This document describes an actual conversation with the program "ChatGPT" as of 3 March 2023.
To use ChatGPT select: https://openai.com/blog/chatgpt/

Contents

Reflection

Notification: If part of this document is used by ChatGPT, the url of this document has to be mentioned.

Introduction

The discussion consists of a series of Questions, Answers and Comments. Both parties in the discussion are treated as equals.

3. Thought Experiments

1. What are thought experiments
Thought experiments are hypothetical scenarios or mental exercises designed to explore and illustrate complex or abstract ideas, often in the context of philosophy, physics, or other fields of study. They typically involve imagining a specific situation or scenario and then analysing the consequences of various hypothetical actions or choices within that situation.
Thought experiments can help people to better understand complex concepts by presenting them in a simplified and hypothetical context. They allow people to explore the implications of different ideas and theories without needing to conduct actual experiments or gather empirical data.
Thought experiments have been used by philosophers for centuries to help them explore ideas related to ethics, metaphysics, epistemology, and other areas of inquiry. In more recent times, thought experiments have also become important tools for scientists and mathematicians who use them to test hypotheses and develop new theories.
Thought experiments only make sense (?) when you have performed an experimental and want to discuss what possibilities there are to modify this experiment in order learn more details.
2. Can you give examples of thought experiments in physics
Sure, here are some examples of thought experiments in physics:
3 In the case of Schrõdinger's cat, the cat is placed in a wooden box, invisible to the physicist. Can this also be a box made of glass?
Yes, the box in Schrõdinger's Cat thought experiment can be made of glass instead of wood. The key aspect of the thought experiment is not the material of the box, but rather the fact that the cat's fate is unknown until the box is opened and observed.

The real question to answer is, how important is this. Assuming that nothing is known what is inside the box, the standard answer is to perform the experiment 1000 times. But not as a thought experiment but as a real experiment
The original thought experiment, as proposed by Schrõdinger, involved a sealed box, which was intended to illustrate the idea of a system that is isolated from its environment. However, the type of material used to construct the box is not a critical aspect of the experiment. In fact, the use of a glass box might make it easier to observe the cat's condition without opening the box.
So, whether the box is made of wood or glass is not important to the basic premise of the thought experiment, which is to highlight the weirdness of quantum mechanics and the idea that the act of observation can have a profound impact on the nature of reality.
Quantum mechanics, understood as the knowledge about the behaviour of the elementary particles, does not involve anything that can be called weird
4. When the box is made of glass the observer continuously knows the state of the cat, if the cat dies and when the box is opened what the final outcome is. The important point is that the observer does not influence the experiment.
You're correct that in the case of a glass box, the observer can continuously know the state of the cat without having to open the box. However, the key idea of the Schrõdinger's Cat thought experiment is not about the observer's knowledge of the cat's state, but rather the concept of superposition and the role of observation in quantum mechanics.
The experiment is designed to illustrate the idea that in the quantum world, particles can exist in a state of superposition where they can simultaneously have multiple properties. In the case of the cat, the idea is that until the box is opened and the cat is observed, it exists in a superposition of being both alive and dead at the same time.
The whole question is if the cat physical is ever both alive and dead at the same time. IMO never,
The experiment is not meant to be a practical or realistic scenario, but rather a way to explore the fundamental concepts of quantum mechanics. While the use of a glass box might change some of the practical details of the experiment, it does not fundamentally alter its underlying principles.
As you pointed out, the observer in the experiment is not supposed to influence the outcome of the experiment, but rather simply to observe it. The idea is to explore the strange and counterintuitive nature of quantum mechanics, not to propose a practical method of observing the state of a cat.
The question is if the behaviour of the elementary particles, including radiation, is ever counterintuitive
5. You claim that before the box is opened, the cat exists of being alive and dead at the same time. The observer knows that the cat is either alive, or dying or dead. What is correct.
You are correct, my previous response was oversimplified and not entirely accurate. The idea of superposition in quantum mechanics does not mean that an object or system exists in all possible states simultaneously. Rather, it means that until an observation is made, the object or system can exist in a probabilistic combination of possible states.
In the case of Schrõdinger's Cat thought experiment, until the box is opened, the cat's state can be described as being in a superposition of both alive and dead, with the probability of each state determined by the decay of a radioactive atom. However, once the box is opened and the cat is observed, its state collapses into a definite state of either being alive or dead, and the observer knows which state the cat is in.
So to answer your question, before the box is opened, the cat exists in a probabilistic combination of both alive and dead states, and the observer does not know which state the cat is in until the box is opened and observed. Once the box is opened, the cat's state collapses into a definite state, and the observer can then know for certain whether the cat is alive or dead.
How do we know that the cat exists in a probabilistic combination of both alive and dead? The observer, observing the cat from the outside, knows that this is not true.
6. Your final answer does not agree with the opinion of the observer, who knows, for example, that the cat is still alive, which agrees with what is finally observed. As such there is no collapse.
You are correct, my previous response was oversimplified and not entirely accurate. The idea of superposition in quantum mechanics does not mean that an object or system exists in all possible states simultaneously. Rather, it means that until an observation is made, the object or system can exist in a probabilistic combination of possible states.
The difference between: "something exists in all possible states simultaneously." versus "something exists in a probabilistic combination of possible states." requires a clarification.
In the case of Schrõdinger's Cat thought experiment, until the box is opened, the cat's state can be described as being in a superposition of both alive and dead, with the probability of each state determined by the decay of a radioactive atom. However, once the box is opened and the cat is observed, its state collapses into a definite state of either being alive or dead, and the observer knows which state the cat is in.
So to answer your question, before the box is opened, the cat exists in a probabilistic combination of both alive and dead states, and the observer does not know which state the cat is in until the box is opened and observed. Once the box is opened, the cat's state collapses into a definite state, and the observer can then know for certain whether the cat is alive or dead.
7. Your final answer does not agree with the opinion of the observer, who knows, for example, that the cat is still alive, which agrees with what is finally observed. As such there is no collapse.
You are correct, I apologize for the confusion in my previous responses. You are right that the observer's knowledge of the cat's state is not equivalent to a collapse of the wave function in the context of the Schrõdinger's Cat thought experiment.
Question 6 and question 7 are the same. This was a mistake from my side. The answers however are quite different.
In the case of the thought experiment, the state of the cat is described by a wave function, which evolves over time until an observation is made. When the observer looks inside the box, they gain knowledge about the state of the cat, but this does not necessarily mean that the wave function has collapsed. The collapse of the wave function refers to the idea that the act of observation forces the system to take on a definite state, with all other possible states becoming irrelevant.
In the case of the Schrõdinger's Cat thought experiment, the act of observation by the observer does not necessarily cause the wave function to collapse. It is only when the observer makes a measurement that the wave function collapses, and this can only occur when there is a direct interaction between the observer and the system being observed.

Again, I apologize for any confusion my previous responses may have caused, and I appreciate you bringing this to my attention.

8. The observer never makes a specific measurement, in the sense that he influences the state of the cat. He only observes the cat continuously.
You are correct that in the case of Schrõdinger's Cat thought experiment, the observer does not make a specific measurement that would influence the state of the cat. Instead, the observer simply observes the cat continuously and gains knowledge about its state through observation.
The key point of the thought experiment is that until the observer makes a direct measurement of the cat's state, the cat's state exists in a superposition of being both alive and dead at the same time. The act of observation does not cause the wave function to collapse on its own, but rather it is the interaction between the observer and the system being observed that causes the wave function to collapse.
In the case of the Schrõdinger's Cat thought experiment, the act of observation by the observer does not directly influence the state of the cat, but it does cause the wave function to collapse, leading to a definite outcome for the state of the cat.

Again, I apologize for any confusion my previous responses may have caused, and I appreciate your patience in working through this.

Reflection 1 - ChatGPT - Introduction discussion

This discussion by ChatGPT is about the Schrõdinger's Cat Thought Experiment.
The experiment consists of a certain number of steps:
  • The experiment consists of a large wooden box with a door, a cat, an experimenter and an observer. To make things simple, there is also a dish with milk.
  • At the start of the experiment, the experimenter places the dish with the milk in the wooden box. Next the cat and finally closes the door of the box.
  • Next the experimenter opens the door, but, and that is important, before he opens the box, he claims that the cat is in a superposition of two states, meaning that the cat is both alive and dead simultaneous or at the same time.
  • When the box is opened, the two states merge into one, i.e. the two states collapse and the cat is either alive or dead. That is the state the observer observes.
IMO to use thought experiments to discuss physics does not make sense. The only way to discuss physics is by means of actual experiments. In general, you cannot discuss any chemical reaction in a thought experiment, including the behaviour of the elementary particles like electrons and photons.
Specific concepts like superposition and collapse of a wave function are outside the realm of thought experiments. They are not clear.

In fact, none of the five thought experiments mentioned are clear.

What this means for the whole discussion, is that the overall impression of the discussion is rather hilarious. ChatGPT understands that there is a problem, that there is a choice, but he does not reject the concept of superposition all together. The physical situation is that when the box is made of wood the observer cannot observe the state of the cat. But when the box is made of glass he can, and if the cat dies, he knows when.

The only way to do that is by performing real experiments.

Reflection 2 - Thought experiments to demonstrate or discuss superposition

The outcome of the game of roulette https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roulette is unpredictable. That means all numbers including the number 0 have the same chance. Does that mean that there is superposition involved? Superposition meaning that the roulette wheel at the same time is in state 0, state 1, state 2 etc until state 36? You can answer: Yes. But what does it mean? The fact is that you don't know the final state when the roulette is turning and you only know this final state when the wheel comes at rest all by itself.
Is there any form of collapse of a wave function involved? Physical: not. Mathematically: ?
Anyway, to answer that question you first need a good description of what we mean with: collapse of a wave function. Collapse is this something physical. A wave function belongs to mathematics.

My own opinion is that ChatGPT does not understand the flow of the discussion, specific the difference between a thought experiment and real experiments. A thought experiment can only be performed in your mind. Real experiments are performed in nature or in a laboratory. You must assume that all people involved have no knowledge about real experiments, which makes any discussion senseless.
ChatGPT does not understand

Reflection 3 - Superposition

In quantum mechanics the concept of superposition, the concept that the state of an object can be in two states simultaneous, is often used.
The Schrõdiger's Cat thought experiment does not explain superposition.
A Flip-Flop https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flip-flop_(electronics) is an electrical combination of two transistors which is either in the state 0 or state 1 or is undecided.
An oscillator is also a combination of two transistors, but not like a Flip Flop is not stable, but continuously moves between the states 0 and 1. You can also stop an oscillator but when you do that its final outcome is random. Meaning any specific outcome is fifty fifty
Certain chemical reactions can create photons. Some of these reactions, require as input one photon and create two new photons. For example, these two photons each have a specific frequency f1 and f2. Under normal conditions both photons are measured.
That means that when you have measured one photon with the frequency f1, at that moment the not measured photon has the frequency f2.
From a physical point this means during the reaction two photons are created, but the actual frequency is only known, to the outside world when one photon is measured. The conclusion is that there exists no specific superposition state.

Feedback

None

Created: 3 March 2023

Back to my home page Index