If the tail swings slowly, and the picture is taken rapidly(fast shutter rate), then the cat's tail will appear to be at two different locations in one instant?
Of course there is a midway point between tv's left and right, so if one captures this mid-moment, then the tail is neithre pointing to any of the tv's.
"It is a well-established fact that subatomic particles
can be in more than one place at the same time." in QM electrons are such a particle. There are three variables of particle detection, where particles:'HAVE-BEEN', 'ARE', and 'WILL BE' , this can be attributed to PAST, PRESENT and FUTURE locations. Lets label past=A, present = B and future = C.
Which have the greatest probabilities at any one instant? thus asking: are there more particles at location A than B?. B than C? or C than A ?
A and C are momentum probables, if B location is exactly known. If one can determine A + B , then C has a high probability of being exact, but to know C is to also have known exactly A + B? to know B is to also have known A, but no guarantee of knowledge of C. To know A is no guarantee of knowlwledge of B + C .
The above is a play with H.U.P and wave-function intepretations, of course: "Nevertheless, the wavefunction
metaphor helps us imagine that a subatomic particle like an electron becomes wave-shaped when no one is looking. What was a discrete ‚Äòparticle' (the electron), now spreads across a region of space, with the hump in the middle of the wave corresponding to the most likely region to find the particle, and the rest of the wave showing other, less-likely but still possible, electron locations." . So one can ask this, if looking away from an electron for a specific short moment, then looking back at it will increase/decrease it's duality?
To locate a particle one has to look "toward" it's probable location, but as one does so it's wave-function becomes less meaningfull, and conversely if one does not look "towards" a particle, it's descrition of being a particle becomes less meaningfull, but it's wave description becomes primary, full? This is where it may be that it has a high probability of being wavelike at one location, coupled with a small probability of being a particle at the same location, needs a further clarification.
It seems to me that the superposition principle, allows experiments wherby the Anton Zeilinger experiments with Atoms and Molocules, can be extended to include a double slit experiment whererby the "slits" are of unequal sizes, and one can designate one slit to be positivly charged and one negatively charged. One should be able to extract Electrons away from Atoms, sending the positivly charged nucleus to the "left-tv" slit, and the negative charged Electron through "right-tv" slit ? Actually if what QM and superpositions are correct, then this experiment could be an Atom Splitter?
Think about the probability of the Atom going left or right, or both at same instant!..the beam splitter of the experiment can be adapted to become an atom splitter. An Atom in a "cat-state", would react to neutrons just like an ordinary Atom. Neutrino's could be the actual "ghost" particles of Macro Atoms, and their triple locations tags (oscillations), are nothing more than Past, Present and Future, observer caused effects?
See here [Link:http://www.phys.hawaii.edu/~jgl/nuosc_story.html]for further reading[/link]