Thought experiments: An effective way to make new discoveries in science?

A thought experiment is a methodology that uses the researcher’s imagination to consider the consequences from events that he or she creates, and its main objective is to test those outcomes.

In light of the atypical method that thought experiments follow, I decided to cogitate about their effectiveness to make new discoveries by analyzing one of them.

The Schrödinger’s cat experiment is probably the most famous one. In this case, a cat is exposed to poisoned gas inside a box, accompanied by a device with radioactive particles which will disintegrate or not after a while, both outcomes with a fifty percent of probability of happening. Consequently, the cat may die or live if the device is activated or not, respectively. The experiment poses a paradox because the cat can be alive and dead at the same time; however, the final outcome can be just one of the two mentioned.

If we follow the early Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics, we would say that the whole experiment shows a paradox, a situation that can’t be accepted since all calculations should show clear results. So, the experiment showed that this initial interpretation was clearly unfinished, leading to later revisions.

This experiment led me to conclude that this type of experiment is mainly for filling holes that some theories present, or to expand to other areas of research. But, do you think it is the solely goal of this type of research?

Here you have a video explaining the experiment in a more understandable way. Enjoy it!