>>7972426
Human observers. Quantum mechanics is proof that the universe was made by God for humans.

>>7972428
What if the photons that are emitted when we look at it hit the wave and change it?

>>7972430
In theory it works but in practice it doesn't.

>>7972426
interaction with any obstacle

I just watched a lecture by Tom Campbell and he said it was because the particles only exist as probabilities until they're observed because when they are observed then the universe has to decide what it wants to have happened. Delayed erasure tests seem to compliment this because the measurement is taken and then deleted before it's recorded.

But that's a really far fetched explanation, that consciousness somehow does it. But he also debunked the notion that looking at the particle somehow applies a force on it and moves it, such as >>7972430. So I'm trying to get another viewpoint, this can't be the only explanation out there right now, some group of scientists must have thought it was bogus and formulated another hypothesis.

>>7972426
This question is exactly why QM is so mindfuck-y.
Interacting with the system does not change it by applying some kind of a force, like >>7972430
Implies.
Observing is basically the universe telling the wave function: "okay probability is cool but I need an actual answer now" which 'collapses' the function, but this raises a lot of philosophical questions that no one really has the time to discuss.
Note that I kinda delved into pop-sci with this explanation but I think it's good enough

>>7972428

>Can't tell if superstitious pseudointellectual or b8

It doesn't have to be human observers. A machine measurement can collapse the wavefunction just fine

>>7972426
You sitting on it.

>>7972671
Prove it, and prove that it the machine + system isn't just in a larger superposition

Your claim is equally as unverifiable as the one you replied to

quantum mechanics is p cool