[ko27]

If you read up on the Delayed-choice quantum eraser experiment [1] you'll see how your "simplistic" explanation leads to paradoxes such as the present altering events that occurred in the past. But if you describe unmeasured states as being in a superposition then there is no paradox.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delayed-choice_quantum_eraser

[prettyStandard]

Does anyone know what the Many World's interpretation of the delayed choice quantum eraser experiment is?

[lmm]

As with most things, under many worlds you barely need any interpretation. You either read the measurement and thereby entangle your own state with what was measured (putting yourself in a superposition of having seen one waveform or the other), or you don't and you see the interference pattern. There's not really anything to interpret or explain.

[russdill]

That there is no delayed choice or quantum eraser. The naming of the experiment is based on waveform collapse interpretations.

[zeroonetwothree]

If you allow hidden variables it’s also easily resolved ;)

[ko27]

Good thing we ruled out local hidden variables. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell_test

[NoThisIsMe]

The local part is important. We haven't ruled out hidden variables. Bell himself preferred hidden variable interpretations.

[ko27]

Yes, I am aware of that, that's why I made sure to mention it. There is a world of difference between local and non-local theories. And in no way do non-local theories fit in any of the simple explanations the original poster had in mind.

> We haven't ruled out hidden variables

No, but we ruled out every non-local or non-real one. Which is a far more interesting achievement.

[mal-2]

Superdeterminism hasn't been ruled out yet.