更改

However, one of the main scientists associated with the Copenhagen interpretation, Niels Bohr, never had in mind the observer-induced collapse of the wave function, as he did not regard the wave function as physically real, but a statistical tool; thus, Schrödinger's cat did not pose any riddle to him. The cat would be either dead or alive long before the box is opened by a conscious observer. Analysis of an actual experiment found that measurement alone (for example by a Geiger counter) is sufficient to collapse a quantum wave function before there is any conscious observation of the measurement, although the validity of their design is disputed. (The view that the "observation" is taken when a particle from the nucleus hits the detector can be developed into objective collapse theories. The thought experiment requires an "unconscious observation" by the detector in order for waveform collapse to occur. In contrast, ’’’<font color=”#32CD32”>the many worlds approach </font>’’’denies that collapse ever occurs.)

However, one of the main scientists associated with the Copenhagen interpretation, Niels Bohr, never had in mind the observer-induced collapse of the wave function, as he did not regard the wave function as physically real, but a statistical tool; thus, Schrödinger's cat did not pose any riddle to him. The cat would be either dead or alive long before the box is opened by a conscious observer. Analysis of an actual experiment found that measurement alone (for example by a Geiger counter) is sufficient to collapse a quantum wave function before there is any conscious observation of the measurement, although the validity of their design is disputed. (The view that the "observation" is taken when a particle from the nucleus hits the detector can be developed into objective collapse theories. The thought experiment requires an "unconscious observation" by the detector in order for waveform collapse to occur. In contrast, ’’’<font color=”#32CD32”>the many worlds approach </font>’’’denies that collapse ever occurs.)

然而，与哥本哈根诠释相关的主要科学家之一尼尔斯·玻尔从未想过观察者引起的波函数的坍缩，因为他并不认为波函数在物理上是真实的，而是一个统计工具;。因此，薛定谔的猫对他不构成困扰。早在盒子被有意识的观察者打开之前，猫就已经死了或者还活着。对实际实验的分析发现，单靠测量(例如使用盖革计数器)就足以在有意识地观察测量之前使量子波函数坍缩，尽管其设计的有效性尚有争议。(原子核中的粒子撞击探测器时进行“观测”的观点，可以发展为客观塌缩理论。思维实验需要探测器进行“无意识的观察” ，以便发生波形坍缩。相比之下，’’’<font color=”#32CD32”>多世界诠释</font>’’’否认崩坍缩的发生。)

然而，与哥本哈根诠释密切相关的主要科学家之一尼尔斯·玻尔从未认为是观察者引起了波函数塌缩，因为他并不认为波函数在物理上是真实存在的，它只是一个统计工具。因此，薛定谔的猫对他不是什么谜题。在有意识的观察者打开盒子，猫就已经处于死了或者活着的状态。分析一个真实的实验过程会发现，在有意识的观察者对测量结果进行观察之前，测量本身（例如盖革计数器）就足以使量子波函数发生塌缩，尽管实验设计的有效性尚有争议。（这种当原子核中的粒子撞击探测器时“观测”已经发生的观点可以发展为客观塌缩理论。薛定谔的思维中，波函数要发生塌缩，探测器需要进行“无意识观察”。相比之下，<font color=”#32CD32”>多世界理论</font>否认曾发生过塌缩。)

The quantum-mechanical "Schrödinger's cat" paradox according to the many-worlds interpretation. In this interpretation, every event is a branch point. The cat is both alive and dead—regardless of whether the box is opened—but the "alive" and "dead" cats are in different branches of the universe that are equally real but cannot interact with each other.

The quantum-mechanical "Schrödinger's cat" paradox according to the many-worlds interpretation. In this interpretation, every event is a branch point. The cat is both alive and dead—regardless of whether the box is opened—but the "alive" and "dead" cats are in different branches of the universe that are equally real but cannot interact with each other.

基于'''<font color=”#ff8000”>多世界诠释many-worlds interpretation</font>'''的量子力学“薛定谔的猫”悖论。按照这种诠释，每个事件都是一个分支点。无论盒子是否打开，猫都是活着的和死了的，但“活着的”和“死了的”猫在宇宙的不同分支中，它们是同样真实的，但不能相互交流。

基于'''<font color=”#ff8000”>多世界诠释many-worlds interpretation</font>'''的量子力学“薛定谔的猫”悖论。按照这种诠释，每个事件都是一个分支点。无论盒子是否打开，猫都是既或者也死了，但“活着的”和“死了的”猫在宇宙的不同分支中，它们同样真实，但不能相互作用。

{{Main|Many-worlds interpretation}}

{{Main|Many-worlds interpretation}}

In 1957, Hugh Everett formulated the many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics, which does not single out observation as a special process. In the many-worlds interpretation, both alive and dead states of the cat persist after the box is opened, but are decoherent from each other. In other words, when the box is opened, the observer and the possibly-dead cat split into an observer looking at a box with a dead cat, and an observer looking at a box with a live cat. But since the dead and alive states are decoherent, there is no effective communication or interaction between them.

In 1957, Hugh Everett formulated the many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics, which does not single out observation as a special process. In the many-worlds interpretation, both alive and dead states of the cat persist after the box is opened, but are decoherent from each other. In other words, when the box is opened, the observer and the possibly-dead cat split into an observer looking at a box with a dead cat, and an observer looking at a box with a live cat. But since the dead and alive states are decoherent, there is no effective communication or interaction between them.

When opening the box, the observer becomes entangled with the cat, so "observer states" corresponding to the cat's being alive and dead are formed; each observer state is entangled or linked with the cat so that the "observation of the cat's state" and the "cat's state" correspond with each other.  Quantum decoherence ensures that the different outcomes have no interaction with each other. The same mechanism of quantum decoherence is also important for the interpretation in terms of consistent histories. Only the "dead cat" or the "alive cat" can be a part of a consistent history in this interpretation. Decoherence is generally considered to prevent simultaneous observation of multiple states.

When opening the box, the observer becomes entangled with the cat, so "observer states" corresponding to the cat's being alive and dead are formed; each observer state is entangled or linked with the cat so that the "observation of the cat's state" and the "cat's state" correspond with each other.  Quantum decoherence ensures that the different outcomes have no interaction with each other. The same mechanism of quantum decoherence is also important for the interpretation in terms of consistent histories. Only the "dead cat" or the "alive cat" can be a part of a consistent history in this interpretation. Decoherence is generally considered to prevent simultaneous observation of multiple states.

当打开盒子时，观察者会与猫纠缠在一起，因此形成了与猫活着和死去相对应的“观察者状态” ; 每个观察者状态都与猫纠缠或联系在一起，以便“观察猫的状态”与“猫的状态”相对应。量子退相确保不同的结果之间不会相互影响。量子退相干的相同机制对于历史一致论也很重要。只有“死猫”或“活猫”才能成为这一解释的一部分。通常认为退相干是为了防止同时观察多个状态。

打开盒子时，观察者与猫纠缠在一起，因此形成了对应猫的生与死的“观察者状态” ; 每个观察者状态都与猫纠缠或联系在一起，因此“猫状态的观察”与“猫的状态”相对应。量子退相干确保不同的结果之间不会相互影响。量子退相干对于历史一致论也很重要。在多世界诠释中，只有“死猫”或“活猫”才能成为一致历史的一部分。通常认为退相干是为了避免同时对多个叠加态进行观察。

A variant of the Schrödinger's cat experiment, known as the quantum suicide machine, has been proposed by cosmologist Max Tegmark. It examines the Schrödinger's cat experiment from the point of view of the cat, and argues that by using this approach, one may be able to distinguish between the Copenhagen interpretation and many-worlds.

A variant of the Schrödinger's cat experiment, known as the quantum suicide machine, has been proposed by cosmologist Max Tegmark. It examines the Schrödinger's cat experiment from the point of view of the cat, and argues that by using this approach, one may be able to distinguish between the Copenhagen interpretation and many-worlds.

The ensemble interpretation states that superpositions are nothing but subensembles of a larger statistical ensemble. The state vector would not apply to individual cat experiments, but only to the statistics of many similarly prepared cat experiments. Proponents of this interpretation state that this makes the Schrödinger's cat paradox a trivial matter, or a non-issue.

The ensemble interpretation states that superpositions are nothing but subensembles of a larger statistical ensemble. The state vector would not apply to individual cat experiments, but only to the statistics of many similarly prepared cat experiments. Proponents of this interpretation state that this makes the Schrödinger's cat paradox a trivial matter, or a non-issue.

'''<font color=”#ff8000”>系综诠释ensemble interpretation</font>'''指出，叠加不过是一个更大的系综的子集合。状态向量不适用于单个的猫实验，而仅适用于许多类似准备的猫实验的统计数据。这种诠释的支持者表示，这使得薛定谔的猫悖论变得无关紧要，或者说是根本不是问题。

'''<font color=”#ff8000”>系综诠释ensemble interpretation</font>'''指出，叠加态不过是一个更大的系综的子系综。态矢量不适用于单个的猫实验，而仅适用于许多类似准备的猫实验的统计数据。这种诠释的支持者认为，这使得薛定谔的猫悖论变得无关紧要，或者说是根本不是问题。

This interpretation serves to discard the idea that a single physical system in quantum mechanics has a mathematical description that corresponds to it in any way.

This interpretation serves to discard the idea that a single physical system in quantum mechanics has a mathematical description that corresponds to it in any way.

The relational interpretation makes no fundamental distinction between the human experimenter, the cat, or the apparatus, or between animate and inanimate systems; all are quantum systems governed by the same rules of wavefunction evolution, and all may be considered "observers". But the relational interpretation allows that different observers can give different accounts of the same series of events, depending on the information they have about the system. The cat can be considered an observer of the apparatus; meanwhile, the experimenter can be considered another observer of the system in the box (the cat plus the apparatus). Before the box is opened, the cat, by nature of its being alive or dead, has information about the state of the apparatus (the atom has either decayed or not decayed); but the experimenter does not have information about the state of the box contents. In this way, the two observers simultaneously have different accounts of the situation: To the cat, the wavefunction of the apparatus has appeared to "collapse"; to the experimenter, the contents of the box appear to be in superposition. Not until the box is opened, and both observers have the same information about what happened, do both system states appear to "collapse" into the same definite result, a cat that is either alive or dead.

The relational interpretation makes no fundamental distinction between the human experimenter, the cat, or the apparatus, or between animate and inanimate systems; all are quantum systems governed by the same rules of wavefunction evolution, and all may be considered "observers". But the relational interpretation allows that different observers can give different accounts of the same series of events, depending on the information they have about the system. The cat can be considered an observer of the apparatus; meanwhile, the experimenter can be considered another observer of the system in the box (the cat plus the apparatus). Before the box is opened, the cat, by nature of its being alive or dead, has information about the state of the apparatus (the atom has either decayed or not decayed); but the experimenter does not have information about the state of the box contents. In this way, the two observers simultaneously have different accounts of the situation: To the cat, the wavefunction of the apparatus has appeared to "collapse"; to the experimenter, the contents of the box appear to be in superposition. Not until the box is opened, and both observers have the same information about what happened, do both system states appear to "collapse" into the same definite result, a cat that is either alive or dead.

'''<font color=”#ff8000”>关系诠释relational interpretation</font>'''并没有从根本上区分人类实验者、猫或仪器，或者有生命的和无生命的系统; 所有这些都是受同样的波函数进化规则支配的量子系统，所有这些都可以被认为是“观察者”。但是关系诠释允许不同的观察者根据他们所掌握的关于系统的信息，对同一系列事件给出不同的解释。猫可以被认为是仪器的观察者; 同时，实验者可以被认为是盒子中系统的另一个观察者(猫和仪器)。在盒子被打开之前，猫是活着还是死了，有关于设备状态的信息(原子要么衰变了，要么没有衰变) ; 但是实验人员没有关于盒子内容状态的信息。这样，两个观察者同时对这种情况有不同的解释: 对猫来说，仪器的波函数似乎是“塌缩”的; 对实验者来说，盒子里的东西似乎是叠加的。直到盒子被打开，并且两个观察者对所发生的事情有了相同的信息，两个系统状态才似乎“坍缩”成为同一个确定的结果，一只猫不是活着就是死了。

'''<font color=”#ff8000”>关系诠释relational interpretation</font>'''认为人类实验者、猫或仪器之间，或者生命体和非生命体之间没有本质区别； 所有这些遵循相同的波函数演化规则的量子系统，都可以被认为是“观察者”。但是关系诠释允许不同的观察者根据他们所掌握的关于系统的信息，对同一系列事件给出不同的解释。猫可以被认为是仪器的观察者; 同时，实验者可以被认为是盒子系统（猫和仪器）的另一个观察者。在盒子被打开之前，根据活着或者死亡的状态，猫拥有关于设备状态的信息（原子已经衰变或没有衰变) ; 但是实验者并不掌握这些信息。这样，在同一时刻两个观察者对盒子的状态有不同的描述： 对猫来说，仪器的波函数“坍缩”了；对实验者来说，盒子系统仍然处于叠加态。直到盒子被打开，两个观察者对所发生的事情都掌握了同样的信息，两个系统状态才似乎“坍缩”成为相同的确定结果，既猫活着还是死亡。