What kills Schrödinger's cat? Underground experiment rules out gravity model for quantum decoherence

The science-journalism coverage adds useful context, while the strongest evidential footing still comes from the underlying data, papers or institutional documentation.

The significance lies in physics only takes a result seriously when the measurement chain remains robust under scrutiny. Experimental particle physics and precision metrology both operate in regimes where the signal sits far below the background noise, and where systematic uncertainties can mimic new physics if not controlled rigorously. The history of the field contains numerous anomalies that generated theoretical excitement before better data showed them to be artifacts, and it also contains genuine discoveries that were initially dismissed as noise. The difference is almost always resolved by independent replication with different instruments and different systematics. This article has been reviewed according to Science X's editorial process and policies. FQxI/Gabriel Fitzpatrick (2026) Somewhere between the microscopic realm of elementary particles and the macroscopic world of human beings, something strange happens: The rules of.

Now, a new experiment has narrowed the field of possible explanations for decoherence, in particular ruling out a prominent theory linking gravity to the process. The results appeared in a paper in the New Journal of Physics in June 2026.

In the 1960s, the Hungarian theoretical physicist Frigyes Károlyházy posited that spacetime is constantly rippling with tiny fluctuations that gradually erode quantum. The fluctuations predicted by Károlyházy can't be observed directly but, if they exist, they should cause charged particles to jiggle and accelerate randomly, giving telltale.

That makes the Gran Sasso National Laboratory, which is tucked beneath 1.4 kilometers (0.9 miles) of radiation-dampening rock, an ideal place to conduct the search. The natural shielding provided by the rock creates one of the quietest environments on Earth for detecting extremely rare physical phenomena," says Curceanu.

The broader interest lies as much in the method as in the headline number, because a durable measurement procedure can travel farther than a single result. When experimental physicists develop a technique that achieves new sensitivity or controls a previously uncharacterized systematic, that methodological contribution persists even if the specific measurement is later revised. This is one reason why precision physics experiments often generate long-term value that is not immediately visible in the original publication.

They collected data for a total of 62 days. Although many assume that quantum gravity cannot be probed by current technology, the new research joins a growing body of work demonstrating that some ideas that involve both.

Because this item comes through Phys. org Physics as science journalism, it should be treated as contextual reporting rather than primary evidence. Good science reporting can identify why a result matters, connect it to the wider literature and make technical work readable, but the decisive evidence remains in the original paper, dataset, mission release or technical record. That distinction is especially important when a story is later repeated by aggregators, because repetition increases visibility, not evidential strength.

The next step is more measurement, tighter systematic control and scrutiny from groups whose experimental setups are genuinely independent. In experimental particle physics and precision metrology, the threshold for a discovery claim is a five-sigma excess surviving multiple analyses; an intriguing signal at lower significance is a reason to run more experiments, not a reason to revise the textbooks. Next-generation experiments currently under construction or commissioning will revisit several of the open questions that give the current result its context.

Source