The Quantum Cat Paradox: Is it Alive, Dead, or Just Ignoring Me?

Quantum superposition is confusing, actually.

Image Credits: https://images.app.goo.gl/befHc7f1sdyiLets8

By: Mary P.

---

I have five cats. Most of the time, I know where they are: on the couch, bird-watching by the window, or hiding under the dining table like furry little gremlins. Classic cat spots, you know. However, two in particular, a bonded mother-daughter pair, are just waaay too fond of cardboard boxes. The thing is, sometimes it’s both of them cuddling up in there. Sometimes just one. Occasionally, it’s a completely different cat. For all I know, it could be one of my dogs. Or even a chicken. You never really know until you peek inside, right?

Weirdly enough, that is quantum physics.

Welcome to the Paradox of the Quantum Cat; where we try figuring out what’s inside the box.

SO, WHOSE IDEA WAS IT?

In 1935, Austrian-Irish theoretical physicist Erwin Rudolf Josef Alexander Schrödinger introduced a thought experiment illustrating the rather peculiar nature of quantum mechanics. His original paper didn’t exactly make waves with the general audience since it was written in a niche and highly technical German. Not until a very unlucky (thankfully hypothetical) cat was brought up.

Fur parents, mild trigger warning ahead :(

Inside a steel box sits a cat minding its own business with a Geiger counter (an electronic instrument for detecting and measuring radiation) and a tiny amount of radioactive substance. 

The setup is rigged so that within an hour, one radioactive atom will decay. Once it does, the Geiger detects it, releases a hammer, and shatters a vial of hydrocyanic acid; which is well… bad news for the cat. 

But with equal probability, nothing happens. No decay, no smashed vial, no harm done, and the cat remains perfectly fine. Probably annoyed that they just attempted to poison him in a closed-up box with a loud chemistry machine, but otherwise, is alive.

"I THOUGHT IT WAS BOTH DEAD AND ALIVE?"

The fate of the cat stays in favor of superposition, as in both dead and alive, because it is stuck in a cosmic maybe unless one checks on it. It’s not like the cat is physically half dead, half alive inside the chamber. It’s that all possibilities only exist as probabilities but are far from being the physical truth yet. Just waves of potentials itching to collapse in reality because the math insists on it. Afterall, once you open the box, only one becomes true. This is what scientists call the collapse of wave function, when observation interacts with a physical environment which forces a decision.

Here’s where it turns a bit absurd. Schrödinger wasn’t even trying to say that the cat is literally ‘zombiefied’ by being both dead and alive at the same time; which is actually much more aligned with the infamous many-worlds interpretation that tells both outcomes exist simultaneously in a parallel universe. The physicist was merely trying to make a witty analogy of how quantum theory would look like when applied to everyday life, with his main point about how superposition leaves all possibilities hang in limbo until observed.

HOW CAN OBSERVATION BE SUBJECTIVE?

(Schrödinger, Wigner, and Why Reality Isn’t Simple)

In theoretical physics, when someone mentions ‘observation’, the best way to portray this is by looking inside Schrödinger’s box and saying “The cat is alive.” 

But in science, nothing is ever that simple. Every answer leads to another “Why?”

In a similar thought experiment, the cousin of Schrödinger’s cat, Wigner’s Friend, asks: what if reality collapses in one person’s observation, but not for someone else? Because to observe doesn’t mean literally eye-ing something. As I mentioned earlier, it’s an interaction that forces a possibility into an outcome. Having said that, what’s odd is that reality can be subjective. It will change depending on who’s doing the observation.

While Schrödinger’s cat normalizes indecisiveness, Wigner’s friend reminds us of the forthgoing questions beyond an answer. But so what? And then what?

Yup, hundred years later, we're still figuring that out.

Good grief, maybe his cat just doesn’t care and is ignoring him on purpose. 

Kinda like my own cats. I can estimate the statistics of who’s in the cardboard box based on their preferred spots by running the numbers on whether it’s the mother, the daughter, a different cat, or perhaps just a confused chicken. But until then, it’s just an educated guess.

At the end of the day, I wonder if Schrödinger’s cat would ever respond to my pspsps?

Probably not. But then again, maybe.

References:

1. Junior, C., Baggott, J., & Warburton, N. (2025, April 28). No, Schrödinger’s cat is not alive and dead at the same time. Aeon. https://aeon.co/essays/no-schrodingers-cat-is-not-alive-and-dead-at-the-same-time

2. Kastner, R. E. (2024). Conventional quantum theory does not support a coherent relational account. arXiv. https://arxiv.org/abs/2406.17290

3. Suarez, A. (2019). The limits of quantum superposition: Should Schrödinger’s cat and Wigner’s friend be considered miracle narratives? arXiv. https://arxiv.org/abs/1906.10524

4. Trimmer, J. (1980). The present situation in quantum mechanics: A translation of Schrödinger’s “Cat Paradox” paper. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, 124(5), 323–338. https://unicamp.br/~chibeni/textosdidaticos/schrodinger-1935-cat.pdf

---

About the author: Mary leads NOVA’s blog team from the Philippines, where she’s currently navigating her life as an aeronautical engineering undergraduate with an ever-growing list of interdisciplinary passion projects and research. Beyond her love for aviation and astrophysics, she enjoys her free time in video games, flight simulators, programming, painting, reading, crafting, and music. She’s aiming for a future in the aerospace systems research and design industry, or wherever the skies take her :)