Comment on A note on the description complexity of physical theories

Wed, 10 Nov 2010 18:10:27 GMT

Copenhagen doesn't imply that. The collapse happens as a result of interaction between the observer and the observed system, which can be an atom or an entire gallaxy.

It has been my experience that there is not consensus amongst professed supporters of the Copenhagen Interpretation about what causes collapse, whether an observer is involved, and what an observer is. Given that, I might handle this "interpretation" by letting it split the probability between the possibilities that result from different concepts of collapse, and then note that it assigns less probability than Many Worlds to the actual outcome.

But, to avoid being unfair to your particular understanding of collapse, what does prase::Copenhagen say an observer is?

Discuss