Quantum Superposition

Quantum superposition, the hypothetical notion that an unobserved subatomic particle exists or could exist in multiple places at once, is one of few concepts associated with quantum physics that the public has become increasingly familiar with.  As with many other aspects of subatomic physics, there is great confusion about the ramifications of superposition.  There are two vital facts about the matter that need to be clarified.  First, nothing about quantum superposition contradicts the laws of logic, the only inherently universal and inviolable set of laws.  Second, although it has been popularized in recent years, quantum superposition is neither necesssarily true nor ultimately supportable.

Regarding the first point, only a completely erroneous understanding of quantum physics tries to pit physics against logic, as if logic could ever actually be metaphysically violated.  A particle existing in multiple locations at once blatantly deviates from our experiences at the macro-level (the scale at which we perceive the external world), but there is no contradiction involved in such a thing.  It is outright deceptive to call this phenomenon, whether or not it actually occurs, illogical--if it was illogical, it would be impossible for it to even hypothetically be true!  Even the laws of physics cannot be proven to govern anything more than one's immediate perceptions of the external world, whereas logic alone must govern all things.

Of course, while there is nothing logically impossible about a material object (like an electron) existing in multiple places simultaneously, simply not knowing where an object is does not mean it is everywhere at once until it is identified.  Just because something could be in one of several given areas does not mean it inhabits all of those area up until it is observed in one of them.  This does not stop many people from assuming that uncertainty about a particle's position somehow means that it has multiple positions.  An analogous issue that people tend to falsely regard in the same way is the thought experiment of Schrodinger's cat.  Although biological life and death are mutually exclusive states, many actually think that an unobserved cat is simultaneously alive and dead.

It should take only a few moments to recognize the stupidity of insisting that life and death can be experienced by the same being at the same moment!  It is likewise easy to at least show that a particle cannot exist and not exist at once.  The possibility of multiple simultaneous locations of a particle aside, though, the inability to pinpoint the position of an electron has significant ramifications for the very model of the atom.  Since the exact location of an electron cannot be determined, the closest one can get to knowing its position is informed probability estimates.  This is why the electron cloud model of the atom is epistemologically superior to the traditional Bohr model: no one can prove that electrons will continue to make the same circuits around their nuclei, and thus one can only predict the seeming probability of an electron being at a certain point in a "cloud" surrounding a nucleus.

The electron cloud model leaves the concept of quantum superposition open without having any relevance to evidentially supporting the notion.  In fact, no one can prove anything about unobserved phenomena except that the laws of logic apply to them by necessity, as the very act of observing something means its unobserved states cannot be known!  Quantum superposition is ultimately neither verifiable nor falsifiable using logic or science (not that science illuminates anything more than one's perceptions to begin with), but it is logically possible--although it does not follow from not knowing where a particle is that it is literally in more than one place at a given moment.  This is a pathetically obvious non sequitur fallacy, and yet it has been widely embraced in the name of a premature scientific revolution.