Your statement that animals can't collapse the wave function is false.  Between 
your statements and Wikipedia, I'll go by Wiki.
 Among 8 principle "Collapse of the Wave function" (enter into Wiki),  4 assume 
it (but do not prove it); while 4 render it redundant and/or unnecessary.

 The first part of your paragraph seems to suggest that you "KNOW' that 
roosters can't collapse wave functions and that only humans can. Yet I find no 
corroboration for this anywhere.  What's your reference, apart from you're 
pulling ridiculous statements out of the top of your head.??  Why not chimps.  
What sets Chimps apart from humans in regard to collapsing wave functions?  
What is the distinctive property of humans (and not chimps), that makes humans 
unique in this regard?  Be specific.
 So far, the only corroborating evidence you have for your statements is that 
you say it. (i.e. no evidence at all).
 When making totally absurd statements such as "only humans can collapse wave 
functions", it's best to have some evidence.  What's your evidence?
 Please cite any reference online and I'll take a look at it. Note that the 8 
"INTERPRETATIONS" below are called that since no single Interpretation amounts 
to a preemptive body of proof.  All are hypotheses. Yet you say you know for 
sure.  That's bizarre!

 The existence of the wave function collapse is required in
 the Copenhagen interpretation the objective collapse 
the transactional interpretation the von Neumann 
 in which consciousness causes collapse On the other hand, 
the collapse is considered a redundant or optional approximation in
 the Consistent histories - Wikipedia 
 Consistent histories - Wikipedia In quantum mechanics, the 
consistent histories[1] (also referred to as decoherent histories[2]) approach 
is intended to give a modern interpretation of quantum mech...
 View on 
 Preview by Yahoo 
 approach, self-dubbed "Copenhagen done right" the Bohm interpretation the many-worlds 
interpretation the 
ensemble interpretation 

Reply via email to