That doesn't answer the question "what is being explained", it answers the question "how is being explained".
I don't follow.
It seems to me, in the Copenhagen interpretation, measurement was a collapse event. Everett is saying, you know, we can probably just model the observer as physical process.
Measurement, to Everett, would be a physical process which can be modeled. A measurment can be said to have objectively happened when the observer creates a record of the measurement.
Not actually a summary, since you introduce elements not present in the original.
Ok, that might be a valid point. What specific elements are not in the original?
It seems to me, in the Copenhagen interpretation, measurement was a collapse event.
Yes, but not a non physical event. That would be Consciousness Causes Collapse
Everett is saying, you know, we can probably just model the observer as physical process.
Yes, but youre reading that as a classical physical process, and then guessing that disturbance must be the classical mechanism by which the appearance of quantum weirdness arises.
What specific elements are not in the original?
Disturbance
If it's worth saying, but not worth its own post (even in Discussion), then it goes here.
Previous Open Thread
Notes for future OT posters:
1. Please add the 'open_thread' tag.
2. Check if there is an active Open Thread before posting a new one. (Immediately before; refresh the list-of-threads page before posting.)
3. Open Threads should be posted in Discussion, and not Main.
4. Open Threads should start on Monday, and end on Sunday.