The famous familiar feline in Schrodinger's belief is related to subatomic physics where a lepton or other subatomic iota has an uncertain hour ahead so an observer has no way to know if it will collapse to save the ASPCA for a life of comfort here or if it will be reigning Felines in the egyptian afterlife for 3000 years! By way of Schrodinger we can't know beforehand if the subatomic event connected up to the cat in the box will be with spin up or spin down so if the cat was in the box and it was like subatomic physics, "the cat would be both alive and dead".
There are three questions here;
First,
..
Is the Uncertainty Principle the same as the improbability of general events we see around us, like a weather forecast in physics?
Second, If the probabilities are indeed like a weather report, do the violate causality like the cat and the box if connected to the unknown weather a week from now?
And if not, what is the difference in the time of the subatomic realm that can be reversed while more prosaic events around us that often cat or can't?
The first question is about the Uncertainty Principle being like more common probabilities around us. Like a weather prediction we know the weather only by general area of flow of the wind and rain tomorrow or the next day till the day it happens for whatever the cause. If the cause is the subatomic collapse of the wave function it still has a cause in the general flow of the field like the weather and for the same reason of complexity we still can't know it exactly, thus the Uncertainty Principle is not the same as the probablities in the subatomic realm. Probabilities are all around us, the Uncertainty Principle as Einstein believed seems to be only about the luck that in the subatomic realm the mass energy of the measuring and measured mote are about at the same level of energy, all around us are examples of proof of Einstein's idea on a vast range of scale from light hitting the moon, to a 10 lb bowling ball hitting a strike for the other team, there's no need for what's measured to be about the same energy as the ray of light or thunder to reach it. So like Einstein I believe the observer doesn't create what's observed with the light of the probe always changing what's seen, and the Uncertainty Principle is not an absolute space time limit, and the probabilities of quantum mechanics are indeed prosaic and more common like the weather. Here are some possible ways to get around the Uncertainty Principle this may be of much worth for computers.
If the probabilities are much like the weather, if we wire up the cat to the weather map of tomorrow "2079 AD is here today"! And if it rains the cat goes to the ATM machines on hold in Pet Airways and if it doesn't rain the cat is fine, we are all alive here today, and the weather tomorrow is the measure of tomorrow, only then we may know about the fate of the cat. Just saying it's possible it will rain is determined by weather science and is not proof the cat is both alive and dead. At all times the cat is either alive or dead and at no time is the cat both.
..
The third question seems the most interesting one. If the subatomic realm is often time reversable because time is always measured by periodic fluctuation like the spin of the particles as little clocks why doesn't this carry over to our more common scale realm of life? Why not just reverse the spins to reverse the time of more mass? As Feynmann believed this actually is true for mass and energy for a short distance after a plus and minus charge are created, even so at longer distance the spins don't stay so aligned and with complexity of the field at more distance time is not reversable. In other words the complexity of the cat proves Schrodinger's idea that the quantum realm is disproven, or at any rate is disproof that it's the same about time here at our size (Supper Size Me!)me than in quantum physics. If mass and energy are truly the same as Einstein believed like matter and antimatter or other electric charges and they are exactly the same even if for some reason we can tell them apart, they should be exactly time reversable. There would be no extra imbalance of entropy to make time assymetrical here where we dwell in the usual life we live with the sweet egyptian goddess. This would seem to be proof that mass energy conservation which says that energy is constant for an isolated system, is disproven by entropy and the assymetry of time. To make Shrodinger's paradox with the time symmetrical in the subatomic realm and the larger realm assymetrical there may be a slight change in each subatomic reaction with a bit of extra energy not measured by E=mc2 with the quanta "leaking out" a bit more of the energy than a completely airtight quantum well might allow. This is not uncommon in subatomic physics, the process of radioactivity can be well described as like a lava dome and there is a bit of trickle that over time (sometimes billions of years) finally leaks through side at the rate predicted and causes the radioactivity. If the quanta were absolute as Einstein believed an electron wouldn't be able to jump from one orbit to another in the atom, the well of the atom would have no leaks, this would only be possible if a lower energy field connects the shells and this would be the cause of entropy.
.. This assymetry of the leaking of entropy must have a cause, this would be the implosion of the gravitational field that would become stronger as it multiplies up to the subatomic realm and close distance and then reacts back internally at the subatomic mass energy density to cause the entropy; the gravitational field itself must be more imbalanced yet to hold the cosmos together without it winding down over infinite time. This field is in GWD my causology the source of all other fields, doing work on the rest and unifying them, the prime mover with extra energy. We couldn't expect a cosmos where no labor is ever done, and labor must have a source, with energy conservation alone and all in balance all motion in the cosmos would have already stopped. If mass and energy were the same as Einstein held there would be no entropy or gravity. Mass and energy seem to be time assymetrical so by E mc2 alone Schrodinger's cat would be both alive and watching the Weather Station 24 hours!
..
..I think this third motif relates to what time is, i.e. if mass and energy are truly not the same, or we couldn't know one from the other, entropy, the imbalance of heat flow from hot to cold is the cause of Schrodinger's Cat being time assymetric and alive or not exactly. Thus Einstein's Emc2 may not be true even if mass and energy are much the same in the quantum realm where "time is symmetrical". Increase the spin of the mass we might say and the linear motion of the energy is conserved in the quanta by almost exactly the same amount but perhaps not quite because entropy and time at longer distances are not balanced and time is not reversable with a definite past purresent and future!
...Energy conservation by the strict definition says "The mass energy of an isolated system remains constant even with the motion of it's constituent mass." However, there are no isolated systems. Gravity and energy conservation hold all the fields together so we would expect that if energy conservation is violated it would have something to do with gravity. In truth if the gravity is squeezing all the mass, the problem with the First Law above is that an "isolated" system to some degree is always decreasing in density and increasing in volume because of the heating and squeezing caused by gravity. The Second Law may disprove Energy Conservation because changes in volume for the same mass change the energy of the system with time.
..
..You may say for an isolated system the gravity flows in with a field of low energy particles to exert the pressure of gravity and conserve momentum and this is then converted over to the more dense expansion of the entropy that flows out, but mass by motion of the field is just moved from one place to another so the energy is conserved because mass and energy are not the same and one is converted the other. However they aren't the same by how we know so entropy doesn't cause the cosmos to expand to 0 density by more expansion to outdistance the lower energy longer range gravity of the cosmos, but the conversion of the gravity to entropy takes work being done and this would be the extra work that keeps the cosmos in motion. Mass moved from one place to another conserves energy but what moves it? It would seem you can't have the same force and motion inward as outward of mass to conserve energy or the mass would stay the same and no work would be done. Only with a difference in the inflowing energy and the outflow of mass is there a net change in the masses of bodies so work is done, and this means mass and energy are not the same. If they were the same they would balance exactly and no outward or inner motion would be possible.
..
..And Einstein's belief in the field being just empty spacetime is not probable by the conservation of momentum and energy in this simple explanation because if there is just empty space time no field can implode inward to cause entropy so there would be no gravity or reradiation of the entropy outward.
If gravity causes entropy, wouldn't time speed up with more gravity and slow with reduced gravity in contradiction with general relativity? As you see on this link mass speeds up time as in subatomic physics where the heavier a meson or other heavy particle is, the faster it radiates out if at rest. If time is spin or other event that oscillates (as time is always seen to be with no exceptions) and by conservation of angular momentum, the more mass the faster the spin so time speeds up with more mass. Einstein's gravitational redshift is more than balanced out by the overall compaction of gravity. Gravity doesn't radiate out in general with redshift it moves masses together or the earth would be inside out. This idea that removing mass from the earth would slow down time a bit might be proven with asteroids of lower mass, they could spin a bit slower if mass was removed than by energy conservation, and atomic clocks would perhaps spin slower there than Einstein would deign. If entropy is the cause of time and its asymmetry with motion slowing at cooler temperatures, with entropy slowed on worlds at lower energy, time may slow about this because nearer to absolute zero, motion ceases and so would motion in oscillation like time. The slowing of time near absolute zero is unproven by relativity because with more gravity is more heat with a higher rate of fall and the higher speed motion Einstein believes is the same as the higher speed of special relativity and its like redshift. Relativity says time slows in near massive worlds, thus with reduced heat by Relativity time should speed up with reduced mass. No doubt the slowing of time near a reduced mass like a comet would not be so much as the change in the already well proven atomic clock of relativity just near the surface of giant worlds because it's well proven that most work doesn't disprove energy conservation, only the small bit of labor that is caused by entropy may do this and in more general physics like the reduction in the 24 hours of the Earth if more mass were added, not a slowing as relativity predicts.
Work is being done in offices and many stores right now if the boss sez and this doesn't violate energy conservation, energy conservation and the distinction of mass and energy that might disprove relativity might be disproven by the smaller change in entropy with it's own change in the atomic clock.
If time and gravity are asymmetrical and gravity is adding extra implosion ot hold things together with much time and because (extra gravity is needed. with more implosion of the field than explosion or we couldn't be here) masses would implode more of the field than they lose with time and this would be why astronomy proves in the history of massive high energy sources they actually gain more mass than they lose. In their evolution galaxies have a mass of about 30 relative to the central mass early and later the mass increases to about 1000 times the mass. With no other source seen for the mass augmentation and both the imbalance of gravity time and entropy and the assumption that there really is a low energy field made of mass and energy there not empty space time as Einstein believed, these are assumptions foreign to relativity that might explain these and about 10 otherwise unexplained conundrums. Click here for the 10 conundrums and perhaps more than a conundrum would be!
..
..By mass energy equivalence Einstein believed a hot iron having more energy has more mass so it would weigh more. My belief is if mass is to some extent the opposite of energy and there can be any ratio of the two the hot iron like an airship with more heat will "weigh" less. Mass and energy seem to be opposite, to me much like mass and inertia, because like more energy, more inertia causes more linear motion, and so on, so you can weigh less in the low latitudes than the north with another ratio of mass to energy than Einstein believed. In truth if they were exactly the same they couldn't be changed to change your weight here. Like nonuniform motion in Special Relativity where work is also done the speed of light changes to then rematch the higher or lower speed of an observer, so the "speed" is constant, while by changes in the internal dynamic of the wavelength of the light and because this by definition this is a change in the momenta of the light, it's speed is changed by a general definition of momentum. If the speed of light changes in a more general sense, with work like changes in mass from low to high latitudes, mass and energy too may not be exactly equivalent and the foundation of relativity might be disproven.
The disproof of the complete mass and energy equivalence is possible in the Fine Structure Constant, the number 1/137 that relates the strength of electromagnetism to the strong force. If a lower energy quantum well has less well defined walls by Mass Energy distinction it might radiate out a bit more than a more massive well, so with light and electromagnetism compared to the strong force and with the huge number of lower energy particles like light and electrons there might be more radiation there from the energy than the mass, just as a more massive body like Jupiter holds on to more of the lighter particles and a world like the earth or moon radiates away its air. Since the permeability of quantum wells made of more than one density, some more complex than others may have a distinct set of ratios and different numbers of radiant particles each may contribute to the exact value of the Fine Structure Constant. The Fine Structure Constant is also the ratio of the electrons speed in the Bohr atom to the speed of light. Thus since the light is lighter than the electron, the light could leak a bit more and over time the Fine Structure Constant might be actually increasing as some recent experiments may claim. The Fine Structure might be related to the expansion of the cosmos with entropy as I say. With more room, the light would perhaps be losing energy by the gravity and starting to bend back around and fall inward to the center of the cosmos to conserve thermodynamic energy quantity of motion, perhaps "not quantity of motive power". The slowing down would be both measure of its leakage and it's entropy too. But if the ratio of the strong force to electromagnetism is changing perhaps and with the strong force also leaking out just a bit, the exact change in the fine structure constant predicted by GWD is exact. Entropy alone which after all is thermodynamic and like Relativity's speed of light doesn't predict the strong force. I've held that the strong force is actually disproof of relativity because if the speed of light is the top speed and light is much about electromagnetism, there is no greater density possible than that of an electric charge, at the speed of light. By Relativity it seems there is no higher speed than the spin of an electron at the speed of light, so if mass is just spinning energy as in GWD the highest density a muon or a meson could have would just be that of an electron, light and electrons only and no heavy particles would be possible.
..Radioactivity as a sort of quantum leakage of entropy thus might not take place completely by E mc2 if mass and energy were completely equivalent, a possible prediction of this idea. This may be why only 1% of the mass is converted to energy in nuclear reactions. There could also be smaller changes in E mc2 by way of the entropy. Since entropy is often smaller change of power than work being done, the change in E mc2 would also be small. Even so the possibility that matter and antimatter, mass and energy, may not fall at the same rate exists. Since you can lift a lighter mass a bit higher up and it will thus fall a bit faster, antimatter, being a bit lighter like energy may be lifted up a bit higher than energy with the same force applied to counteract the gravity in an updated version of Millikan's oil drop experiment, still the best proof we have of the existence of the electron. Actually since electrons and positrons are like matter and energy with electrons at a lower filled field of mass and positrons are also proven to be higher energy and with more motion, they're like matter and energy and if matter and energy are the opposite it takes an equivalent downward attractive field to counteract the motion of the positron while the electron uses an expanding upward field of almost the same mass energy and so on. If mass and energy are not quite the same the fields are not just opposite in direction and force as mass energy inequivalence would predict, there is also a slight change possible in the level of the electron and positron above the floor of the lab machine even if the same force is applied, because mass and energy are so important to physics a more internal distinction of the mass and energy of the charges may exist even if the applied force is the same.
..
