# A No-Go Theorem for Observer-Independent Facts

^{1}

^{2}

## Abstract

**:**

## 1. Introduction

## 2. Deutsch’s Version of Wigner’s Friend Experiment

## 3. The No-Go Theorem

**Postulate**

**1.**

**Theorem**

**1.**

- 1.
- “Universal validity of quantum theory”. Quantum predictions hold at any scale, even if the measured system contains objects as large as an “observer“ (including her laboratory, memory etc.).
- 2.
- “Locality”. The choice of the measurement settings of one observer has no influence on the outcomes of the other distant observer(s).
- 3.
- “Freedom of choice”. The choice of measurement settings is statistically independent from the rest of the experiment.
- 4.
- “Observer-independent facts”. One can jointly assign truth values to the propositions about observed outcomes (“facts”) of different observers (as specified in the postulate above).

**Proof.**

## 4. Relation to the Paper by Frauchiger and Renner, arXiv: 1604.07422

**(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).”

**S**${}_{1}$- If F${}_{1}$ sees $r=t$, then W sees $w\ne ok$.
**S**${}_{2}$- If F${}_{2}$ sees $z=+$, then F${}_{1}$ sees $r=t$.
**S**${}_{3}$- If A sees $x=ok$, then F${}_{2}$ sees $z=+$.
**S**${}_{4}$- W sees $w=ok$ and is told by A that $x=ok$.

**S**${}_{a}$- Observer W assigns the truth value “true” to the statement: “A sees $x=ok$”;
**S**${}_{b}$- Observer A assigns the truth value “true” to the statement: “If $x=ok$, then F${}_{2}$ sees $z=+$”;
**S**${}_{c}$- Observer W assigns the truth value “true” to the statement: “A concludes that F${}_{2}$ sees $z=+$”.

**T**- Observer W concludes that A concludes that F${}_{2}$ concludes that F${}_{1}$ concludes that $w\ne ok$.

**S**- Observer W concludes that $w\ne ok$,

## Funding

## Acknowledgments

## Conflicts of Interest

## Appendix A

## References

- Wigner, E.P. Remarks on the mind-body question. In The Scientist Speculates; Good, I.J., Ed.; Heinemann: London, UK, 1961. [Google Scholar]
- Everett, H. “Relative State” Formulation of Quantum Mechanics. Rev. Mod. Phys.
**1957**, 29, 454–462. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Rovelli, C. Relational quantum mechanics. Int. J. Theor. Phys.
**1996**, 35, 1637–1678. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Fuchs, C.A. Notwithstanding Bohr, the Reasons for QBism. Mind Matter
**2017**, 15, 245–300. [Google Scholar] - Ghirardi, G.C.; Rimini, A.; Weber, T. Unified dynamics for microscopic and macroscopic systems. Phys. Rev. D
**1986**, 34, 470. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Diosi, L. Models for universal reduction of macroscopic quantum fluctuations. Phys. Rev. A
**1989**, 40, 1165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Penrose, R. On gravity’s role in quantum state reduction. Gen. Relat. Gravit.
**1996**, 28, 581–600. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Brukner, Č. On the quantum measurement problem. In Quantum [Un]speakables II; Bertlmann, R., Zeilinger, A., Eds.; The Frontiers Collection; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Frauchiger, D.; Renner, R. Single-world interpretations of quantum theory cannot be self-consistent. arXiv, 2016; arXiv:1604.07422. [Google Scholar]
- Deutsch, D. Quantum theory as a universal physical theory. Int. J. Theor. Phys.
**1985**, 24, 1–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Bell, J.S. Speakable and Unspeakable in Quantum Mechanics; Collected Papers on Quantum Philosophy; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2004. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Peres, A. Quantum Theory: Concepts and Methods; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 1995; p. 173. [Google Scholar]
- Zukowski, M.; Brukner, Č. Quantum non-locality—It ain’t necessarily so …. J. Phys. A Math. Theor.
**2014**, 47, 424009. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Fuchs, C.A.; Schlosshauer, M.; Stacey, B.C. My Struggles with the Block Universe. arXiv, 2015; arXiv:1405.2390. [Google Scholar]
- Jammer, M. The Philosophy of Quantum Merchanics: The Interpretations of QM in Historical Perspective; John Wiley and Sons: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 1974; pp. 197–198. [Google Scholar]
- Bohm, D. A Suggested Interpretation of the Quantum Theory in Terms of “Hidden” Variables, I and II. Phys. Rev.
**1952**, 85, 166–193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Hooft, G.T. Free Will in the Theory of Everything. arXiv, 2017; arXiv:1709.02874. [Google Scholar]
- Brown, H.R.; Timpson, C.G. Bell on Bell’s theorem: The changing face of nonlocality. In Quantum Nonlocality and Reality: 50 Years of Bell’s Theorem; Bell, M., Gao, S., Eds.; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Araújo, M. Understanding Bell’s Theorem Part 3: The Many-Worlds Version. Blog: More Quantum. Available online: http://mateusaraujo.info/2016/08/02/understanding-bells-theorem-part-3-the-many-worlds-version/ (accessed on 2 August 2016).
- Hardy, L. Quantum mechanics, local realistic theories, and Lorentz-invariant realistic theories. Phys. Rev. Lett.
**1992**, 68, 2981. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] - Hardy, L. Nonlocality for two particles without inequalities for almost all entangled states. Phys. Rev. Lett.
**1993**, 71, 1665. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] - Baumann, V.; Hansen, A.; Wolf, S. The measurement problem is the measurement problem is the measurement problem. arXiv, 2016; arXiv:1611.01111. [Google Scholar]
- Sudbery, A. Single-World Theory of the Extended Wigner’s Friend Experiment. Found. Phys.
**2017**, 47, 658–669. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Bub, J. Why Bohr was (Mostly) Right. arXiv, 2017; arXiv:1711.01604. [Google Scholar]
- Brukner, Č; University of Vienna, Austria; Austrian Academy of Sciences, Austria; Renner, R.; Institute for Theoretical Physics, ETH Zürich, Switzerland. Personal communication, 2017.
- Bohr, N. Quantum Physics and Philosophy: Causality and Complementarity. In Philosophy in Mid-Century: A Survey; Klibansky, R., Ed.; La Nuova Italia Editrice: Florence, Italy, 1963. [Google Scholar]
- Greenberger, D.M.; Horne, M.A.; Shimony, A.; Zeilinger, A. Going beyond Bell’s Theorem. Am. J. Phys.
**1990**, 58, 1131–1143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Leegwater, G. When GHZ Meet Wigner’s Friend. Erasmus University Rotterdam: Rotterdam, The Netherlands, Unpublished manuscript. 2017. [Google Scholar]

**Figure 1.**Deutsch’s version of the Wigner-friend thought experiment. An observer (Wigner’s friend) performs a Stern–Gerlach experiment on a spin 1/2 particle in a sealed laboratory. The outcome, either “spin up” or “spin down”, is recorded in the friend’s laboratory, including her memory. A super-observer (Wigner) describes the entire experiment as a unitary transformation resulting in an encompassing entangled state between the system and the friend’s laboratory. The friend is allowed to communicate a message, which only reports whether she sees a definite outcome or not, without in any way revealing the actual outcome she observes.

**Figure 2.**A Bell experiment on two entangled observers in a Wigner-friend scenario. The super-observers Alice and Bob perform their respective measurements on laboratories containing the observers Charlie and Debbie, who both perform a Stern–Gerlach measurement on their respective spin-1/2 particles.

© 2018 by the author. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

## Share and Cite

**MDPI and ACS Style**

Brukner, Č.
A No-Go Theorem for Observer-Independent Facts. *Entropy* **2018**, *20*, 350.
https://doi.org/10.3390/e20050350

**AMA Style**

Brukner Č.
A No-Go Theorem for Observer-Independent Facts. *Entropy*. 2018; 20(5):350.
https://doi.org/10.3390/e20050350

**Chicago/Turabian Style**

Brukner, Časlav.
2018. "A No-Go Theorem for Observer-Independent Facts" *Entropy* 20, no. 5: 350.
https://doi.org/10.3390/e20050350