Mixing relativity and quantum mechanics - confused Sir Schrodinger?

The cat story

A meaningful combination into quantum gravity is known to be central problem in physics today. Deep thought into this problem has presented some twists. Fundamental to relativity is the total denial of any special coordinate system. That and constancy of speed of light in any system is enough to derive all of special theory of relativity. That it is sufficient, together with symmetries being sufficient to derive other basic physics interactions at particle level, are enough in my mind to conclude

1.       Physical laws are not magical or divinely configured but consequences of geometry. This conclusion if further strengthened by being able to derive some constants as inevitable consequences of geometric ratios. Given that geometry itself is an emergent phenomenon from planck quantization of space and time, is the final straw in many extreme effects.

2.       Above leads one to examine quantum phenomenon as inevitable consequences of coordinate systems and great gap between neutrino sizes and planck sizes! Neutrinos are very hard to even show existence of! Very elaborate, huge and many yearlong investigations are required to even get data on neutrinos. Experiments include huge caverns, one km cube of ice at south pole, half the world production of Xenon for ten years, sea bottom in Mediterranean etc.

This note is about coordinate thinking applied to Schrodinger cat and my confusion. Consider a coordinate system attached to an observer outside the system. Clearly the cat is in superposition, alive and dead same time. But relative to a system attached to cat, the cat is alive or dead! No complication! That the elaborate preparation of the scientist complicated his quantum state. But not the cats! So my confusion – A particle may be at once in mixed quantum state. But to say an extended object is, either says EVERY particle is at once in mixed quantum state simultaneously, say once in 10^100  CCC universes, a VERY rare happening indeed, or the poor scientist has managed to make his state mixed, these are the two possibilities! There is nothing magical happening. Perhaps the only confused is Sir Schrodinger!

Independent of, similar to, but later to Sir Stonjek, who provides evidence  that perhaps I am  lot less confused.

 Questioning Single World interpretation of QM

There is an  interesting thought experiment, called Wigner’friend from above (makes the link fun reading). It shows the collapse standard interpretation gets into hot water! But the point below shows that ANY single world interpretation, including my earlier own Bohm’s, is either wrong or QM is non-unitariity (All probabilities do not add to one!) So only survivor is Everett's many world or my synthesis by 2D time!

Single-world interpretations of quantum theory cannot be self-consistent

According to quantum theory, a measurement may have multiple possible outcomes. Single-world interpretations assert that, nevertheless, only one of them "really" occurs. Here we propose a gedanken-experiment where quantum theory is applied to model an experimenter who herself uses quantum theory. We find that, in such a scenario, no single-world works interpretation can be logically consistent. This conclusion extends to deterministic hidden-variable theories, such as Bohmian mechanics, for they impose a single-world interpretation. This is done by proving

Main result (informal version) There cannot exist a physical theory T that has all of the following properties:

 (QT) Compliance with quantum theory: T forbids all measurement results that are forbidden by standard quantum theory (and this condition holds even if the measured system is large enough to contain itself an experimenter). 

(SW) Single-world: T rules out the occurrence of more than one single outcome if an experimenter measures a system once.

 (SC) Self-consistency: T’s statements about measurement outcomes are logically consistent (even if they are obtained by considering the perspectives of different experimenters).

I interpret this result as denying all interpretations but three multiple worlds (Everett's many world, quantum chemistry some world, mine oneworld 2D time) and QBism (B=Bayesian). Mark my words, 2018 is Quantum-interpretation semifinals!

I