»Sati & Schrodinger’s Cat«

At the end of fight between Neo and Smith, a cat runs into the matrix and enlivens Sati. Does anyone know what that means? I think it is a quantum mechanic’s metaphor for Divine Intervention. It represents the actualization of the possibility where spirit, love and light (rising sun) is preserved and propagated in form Sati even in the future version of matrix. Any thoughts/ ideas/ explanations on this?

“Schrodinger’s Cat” is a famous book that explores quantum mechanics, nature of reality and probability of a certain outcome. Schrdinger was a physicist who is known as one of the Fathers of Quantum mechanics. Schrdinger also subscribed to ideas explored in Upnishads (scriptures from where some of the chants in the movie are taken) He has written a very interesting book called “My views on Life”

I think the cat is a simple tie back to the first movie where Neo had a de-ja-vu and saw the cat twice.

Interesting theory on the cat though. If im not mistaken Schrodengers cat theory is based on probability and fate. It states that you can put a cat in a box and drop Poison gas in the box with the cat. Once this is done the cat should be dead but you cant tell that probability beyond the shadow of a doubt without actually inspecting the inside of the box and observing the cat is dead yourself. So until you observe the cat is dead you can never know its fate hence the cat is neither dead or alive until someone observes the cats state.

Starbuck

Yes you are right about the experiment mentioned in the book. I have read that book. It is a very interesting book. That is why I wondered if there is a connection there. If Smith prevailed, Sati (like the Schrödinger’s Cat) would have been left dead (comatose?) on the floor. Instead Neo prevails and as an outcome of that event (fate and probability connection here), Sati (and love) is preserved for the next matrix.

The cat to show some Deja-Vu here at that juncture doesn’t make sense to me in the plot. Anyway, I thought the scene was very cool and mystical.

I also thought the cat was just a tie-back to the first Matrix but you make a good point. Doesn' seem like the Brothers to just put the cat there to remind us of deja-vu...

my take on the cat at the end of Revolutions is that it tied in to the scene from M1, where Neo sees the same cat twice and calls it dejavu. Trinity tells him that dejavu is really a glitch in the Matrix that occurs "when they (the machines) change something". So the cat is a symbol for change.

In Revolutions, when we see the cat walk up to Sati, we also see a ripple through the Matrix as the machines rebuild/restore it after the damage caused by Smith and Neo.

In M1 the agents intervene and alter the events which appear as Deja-Vu to Neo and lead to capture of Morpheus. In M3 the outcome of battle between Neo and Smith may enable Neo to intervene and influence the outcome to put charge back in Sati. Hence I referred to it as Devine Intervention. Both views don’t necessarily contradict. I agree with you that they show the cat when something is changed in the matrix.

But what I am really wondering about is the use of Cat as a metaphor to show altering of events to lead to certain outcome. It bears a strong connection to the book I mentioned.

the scene with the cat is to show that the matrix has been changed. from the first movie we know that things happen twice (or a glitch occurs) when something is changed. together with the sweeping line of code/cells in the scene we are told that the whole of the matrix has been modified.

there is no connection between mysticism or other such (imho)bunkum with schrodinger's cat. it was originally a joke designed to bring to light the problems implied by his wave equation. a cat is enclosed in a box and poison gas is released or not depending on the emission(or not) of radiation by an element. now according to schrodinger's equation, the wave is formed only when the particle is observed, and until then remains in a sort of middle-state between the two. so the radiation is neither emitted nor not emitted until it has been observed and the wave 'soldifies' into existence. so this implies that the cat is neither alive nor dead until the box opened and somebody observes it.

the point is that this is not what happens in reality. phenomena do not happen because they are observed. what we have to understand is that physics has left the era when it used to create models which reflected what 'really is'. the present models are designed to explain observations, not describe what 'really is'. we cannot expect, indeed it is impossible, that the secondary models created by science conform to reality. so, before the 20th century, u could say that there 'really is' an electron, which most people think of as a tiny colourless sphere. quantum mechanics has left that practice of creating graphic models. so it is foolishness to think that just because schrodinger's equation cannot predict waves until they are observed, things happen in the real world only when they are observed. it is just a model to explain and predict observations.

all this is because of the uncertainity principle. instead, connecting it to fate and divine intervention and whatnot is simply

ralph_angelus wrote:

all this is because of the uncertainity principle. instead, connecting it to fate and divine intervention and whatnot is simply

That’s true. I don’t know this cat story but it makes sense to relate it to the Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle regarding measurements and predictions in the world of quantum physics (not in our day-today world where Newton’s theories hold up pretty well).

The cat could have been a reference to so many things. But quantum physics?

Nobody is implying that Schrodinger’s equation can predict reality. It is foolish and arrogant to do that and wrong comprehension on your part to assume that is what was implied. The book deals with quantum probabilities. In macro-world (for simple folks) these probabilities can be looked at Event/Outcomes. In that sense there is a connection here. A metaphor is not the reality itself, its purpose is to indicate connection. It is just a means to an end.

Ralph, you are right about Schrödinger’s Cat as a model. But I think you are too hasty to dismiss a thought as unscientific. Schrödinger himself was a harsh critic of such attitude. Read “My Views on life “. It was the last few metaphysical essays written by him. Also read “Dancing with Wu-Li masters” which touches upon this subject. All I am saying you are too quick to dismiss it away.

Anyway.

Also, nobody disputes (read few earlier posts) here that in the movies a cat is shown when something in matrix is intervened. When bad guys do it in M1 to capture Morpheus, it is devilish intervention and when good guys do it to in M3 to charge Sati back in new matrix it is divine intervention. As simple as that. No occultism implied. The key idea is that somebody can influence change in the matrix and whenever they do it a cat shown. The question here is… why cat? I am trying to explore that.

Now, because I had read the book and remembered the picture on the cover (looked like a digital diagram of the cat) and considering the subject matter of the book, I think there might be connection.

Hey, you may be right and I might be crazy…

schrodinger's equation CAN predict reality. how else would it be considered a scientific theory? the difference is that the model of reality which the equation uses may not resemble reality itself. it can only predict events, but doesnt say anything abt the 'true' nature of reality. the concept of an electron helps to explain certain phenomena, but there are no electrons in reality. in the same way, the concept that the wave exists only when it is observed is a handy theory, but this doesnt mean that the cat becomes dead or alive only when it is observed. this is the conclusion we must guard against. i think this is what most of the modern quantum physics-enthusiasts are trying to do, making claims and concepts out of the wrong assumption that the secondary, perceived models of science reflect 'true' reality. hence we have all those (mis)conceptions which say uncertainity and probablity are related to fate and choice and whatnot.

yes, i know schrodinger was infatuated with mysticism. i'm ashamed my countrymen had to write that vedanta crap and delude poor scientists. i want to read those two books, i have been searching for them for a long time. can u help me find their ebook versions?

ok, i didnt understand that u used 'divine intervention' as a metaphor. but i dont think neo or the agents can change the matrix on a wholesale basis, rebuild the whole construct. only the architect or maybe something above him can do that.

you're not crazy, u just need a bit more skepticism to complement ur imagination. imagination alone or skepticism alone is useless.

schrodinger's equation CAN predict reality. how else would it be considered a scientific theory?
>> It doesn’t predict reality, just probabilities and definitely not the whole reality. Do you mean the theory is perfect and there is no need for any other pursuit of reality, just learn quantum theory and you know all the reality? For a person advocating skepticism you seem to have a blind faith in anything branded “scientific” and a prejudice against anything not. It is just different form of superstition. Every scientific theory has been found to be inadequate and incomplete and they fail to predict the whole reality and at all the times, but they have practical uses in certain boundary limits. I know when people abandon reason they become lunatic, but when they cling to only reason at any cost they become demonic. Like that Merovingian (cause and effect my friend that is his only world) I have experienced that myself. A simple thing like love, how many times we haunt our partner to “Prove to me!” as if it can be mathematically proven. Can you set up Schrödinger’s equation to predict the reality of love?


yes, i know schrodinger was infatuated with mysticism. i'm ashamed my countrymen had to write that vedanta crap and delude poor scientists.
>> M3 has a chant in the end from Upanishad and the movie ends with “Om Namah Shivay” I guess brothers are deluded too. I would say it is worth being “deluded” like that. Calling Vedanta crap is not even worth arguing. Just shows your prejudice. I would recommend you to put your doubts to test. No body can convince you otherwise. If you doubt something go all the way with the doubt, you may end up with some insight. Sometimes people cannot appreciate their own goodness and try to imitate rich and powerful. I have come across some very profound thoughts and ideas from Upanishad and Gita. There is a powerful technique called “Sudarshan Kriya” At the end of it the same chant is sung (“Asato Ma Sat Gamay and so on...”) This technique is bit like getting out of matrix and being in the realm of meditation. The Sanskrit word of meditation is “Dhyan” pronounced as “Chan” (Zen) by Chinese and Zion in rough middle-eastern accent. Zion is that meditative space of reality and in India you are very close to the some of the techniques taught to enter there. Please explore. I don’t want to convince you of anything. These things cannot be done that way. And it is easy to snicker (like Mr. Smith) at these things away as they don’t appear to be cool in modern sense. But in the end, you may feel proud of your countrymen (are you really from India? See, I am skeptical!). Anyway, I know it is easy to get carried away with MTV and all the external razzle-dazzle. But dive deep, into the underground city of Zion to know the reality (a metaphor again, don’t start running mathematical equation on it).


i want to read those two books, i have been searching for them for a long time. can u help me find their ebook versions?
>> I read them in Barnes & Nobels, a popular book store chain in USA. Do you have them in India? Another interesting book is “Taos of Physics” by Frank Capra (I may have miss-spelled it).

ok, i didnt understand that u used 'divine intervention' as a metaphor. but i dont think neo or the agents can change the matrix on a wholesale basis, rebuild the whole construct.
only the architect or maybe something above him can do that.
>> Again, you are arguing as if that is implied. They can influence change in matrix doesn’t mean that I implied that they can rebuild the whole construct.

you're not crazy, u just need a bit more skepticism to complement ur imagination. imagination alone or skepticism alone is useless.
>> Skepticism has a useful purpose just as intuition and faith has its own purpose. That is why I am exploring and not "asserting". You also need to be more skeptical when dismissing something as Crap.

Going back to the question of the post; why Cat for showing the change in matrix? Do you have a thought on that?

yes, the usage of the cat baffles me too. the simplistic explanation would be that since they used they cat in the first movie, they had to use it later on.

there is an abundance of religious(and related) symbolism in the trilogy. the concept they were trying to get across in the first movie was déja vu, and the black cat is the obvious symbol. so they HAD to use it again in the 3rd movie, to imply the same thing, or they would have had to show a lengthy explanation like in the 1st movie. is there any need to dig deeper into this? as the main site adequately explains, there are many hints at 'deep' meanings in the movies which turn out to be blind alleys.

u've misunderstood me very badly if u thought i said that schrodinger's equation can predict the whole of reality. NO scientific theory can do that, ever. because of many reasons, but a simple one is the uncertainity principle. what i'm saying is that quantum physics must not be associated with anything 'spiritual' or 'mystical'. not because those things are false, but because quantum physics is just a collection of mathematical models. nothing more, and nothing less. it would be like the 19-century tendency to oppose/associate science and religion(christianity). both deal with totally different, with mutually exclusive, incompatible approaches, designed only for use in their respective fields.

please dont lecture my about what is my 'national heritage'. i probably know more abt the vedanta than u do, and i'm fluent in hindi and sanskrit. dont be skeptical abt my being from india. i'm from cochin, a city in kerala, which is in the southernmost part of india. i dont give much importance to 'our' form of meditation because it concentrates on the self rather than on God. the only complete form of meditation is the contemplation of the Infinite, not breathing exercises and sitting postures. can the eastern mystics ever aspire to the awesome clarity and vision of an Augustine, Origen or Erasmus? never, because their starting point is flawed - primitive nature worship and polytheism, and emphasis of the self. isnt it ironic, westerners drawn to philosophy and religion look too much to the east where there is only hollow ritualism. heard all about transcendental meditation<<cough>> and zen and whatnot but never read Augustine? what can i say!

MTV? please, there are few things i despise more than the mtv culture and western consumerist yuppies!

And I think, cat was there because he was looking for mice

Ralph, I consider myself belonging to all religions at once. I love Christ as well as vision of Vedanta and I see no contradiction. I see no duality between spirituality and science when understood right. The same with self and infinite if you really understood what Christ meant when he said “the kingdom of god (infinite) is within you (self)”.

This duality you are nurturing gives such a condescending and hateful tone to your thoughts. If you see M3 closely enough, that is what it drives to. Neo becoming one with everything and everyone and ultimately merging into source (infinite). Also, you have misunderstood the practice of polytheism and Vedanta. There is not only one God, but all there is only God. Then you can invoke/worship it from any form and anywhere. In that vision there is no room for “My way is better than you” which seem to be your tone when you refer to anything other than your belief system. Take out your glasses and try to step out of your belief matrix. Go to the source to save Zion.

Anyway, your last post explains your dogmatic and rigid tone and I am sorry if the Cat has been a bit hard on you.

Long Live Zion!

oic, you are a syncretist. but its a tricky business, eclectism can lead to losing both the birds in the bush as well as those in the hand. no one so far has created a coherent syncretist religion, and i dont think anybody ever will.

i think there IS a dualism in all of reality - throughout the universe as well as in our minds and whatnot. an example, to be happy, u must stop doing things for ur own hapiness and do things for others. there are two sides on every coin i see.

Quote:

all there is only God

PANTHEISM? i raised most of those arguments and counterpoints just for fun and the sake of argument, but that is REALLY bad. its just a form of escapism, refusing to see the truth.

my advice to u, if u ever visit india, DONT ever go to any of those meditation/related programs. they're all run by quacks to milk tourists. but then again, its good for our economy.

rigid and dogmatic! its ok, i'm only 16, i have a lot more time to develop my philosophy

smash, i agree, the cat was there for the mice

Quacks don't have monopoly in India, they are just about everywhere. I have already been to India a couple of times over and know how to avoid them. Quacks usually claim that their way is the best way (all the while insulting others). I hope you will learn to avoid them too.

Terminator III would be a great movie for you, you can avoid a lot of thinking there. At 16, you seem to be too sure, close minded and a bit deprived on tolerance. But again you say you are just 16. So we will let it slide.

Peace. Om Shanti.

especially, about “Kingdome of God is within you” There is a lot of misinterpretation goes on to use religions to create divisions rather than unity. All the wars and violence is caused by wrong emphasis on dualistic understanding. One of these days I would like to visit India too.

Thanks for your post.

peace, bEagle! i said all that just for the sake of argument. why did u have to take that as a personal insult?

and needless to say i like T3, for falling asleep

pax vobiscum

Thanks Kathy. Wish you make the journey too.