The Gedankenexperiment advanced by Frauchiger and Renner in their "Nature" paper was based on an implicit assumption that one can synchronize stochastic measurement intervals between two non-interacting systems. This hypothesis, the author demonstrates, is equivalent to the complete entanglement of these systems. Consequently, Frauchiger and Renner's postulate Q is meaningless and needs to be narrowed. Accurate reformulation of the postulate Q1 does not entail any paradoxes with measurement. This paper is agnostic concerning particular interpretations of quantum mechanics. Nor does it refer to the "collapse of the wavefunction."
The Gedankenexperiment advanced by Frauchiger and Renner in their "Nature" paper was based on an implicit assumption that one can synchronize stochastic measurement intervals between two non-interacting systems. This hypothesis, the author demonstrates, is equivalent to the complete entanglement of these systems. Consequently, Frauchiger and Renner's postulate Q is meaningless and needs to be narrowed. Accurate reformulation of the postulate Q1 does not entail any paradoxes with measurement. This paper is agnostic concerning particular interpretations of quantum mechanics. Nor does it refer to the "collapse of the wavefunction."
In a recent publication in Nature Communications by Frauchiger and Renner
(Nat. Commun. 9, 3711 (2018)), a Gedankenexperiment was proposed, which was
claimed to be able to lead to inconsistent conclusions with a self-referential
use of quantum theory. Thus it seems to prove that quantum theory cannot
consistently describe the use of itself. Shortly after, Chen and Zhang
suggested an improvement (arXiv:1810.01080) which can made the explanation of
the Gedankenexperiment become consistent. Here we show that from the viewpoint
of any quantum interpretation theory which agrees that there is collapse of the
wavefunction when being measured (e.g., the Copenhagen interpretation), the
original conclusions of Frauchiger and Renner actually came from an incorrect
description of some quantum states. With the correct description there will be
no inconsistent results, even without modifying the original
Gedankenexperiment.
Recent extended formulations of the Wigner's friend thought experiment throw the measurement problem of quantum mechanics into sharper relief. Here I respond to an invitation by Renner to provide a consistent and concrete set of rules for quantum mechanics which can avoid the apparent paradox formulated by Frauchiger and Renner [Nat. Comm. 9, 3711 (2018)]. I propose a slight addition to standard textbook quantum mechanics, in the form of two rules, which avoids the paradox. The first specifies when a given quantum dynamics can be interpreted as a measurement. Potentially any dynamics can, but doing so depends on the context of other performed operations. The second requires that a joint context be used to determine whether several different dynamical evolutions can all be interpreted as measurement. The paradox is then avoided because not every participant in the Frauchiger-Renner thought experiment regards the stated dynamical descriptions of the experiment as measurements.
Schrodinger's cat and Wigner's friend paradoxes are analyzed using the `wave-particle non-dualistic interpretation of quantum mechanics at a single-quantum level' and are shown to be non-paradoxes within the quantum formalism. Then, the extended version of Wigner's friend thought experiment, proposed in a recent article titled, ``Quantum theory cannot consistently describe the use of itself '', Nature Communications {\bf 9}, 3711 (2018), by Frauchiger and Renner (FR) is considered. In quantum mechanics, it's well-known that, statistically observing a large number of identical quantum systems at some particular quantum state, which results in Born's probability, and merely inferring its presence in the same quantum state with the same probability yield distinct physical phenomena. If this fact is not taken care while interpreting any experimental outcomes, then FR type paradoxes pop up. ``What an astonishingly self-consistent the Quantum Theory is!' - is explicitly worked out in the case of FR gedankenexperiment. The present work shows the importance of single-quantum phenomenon for the non-paradoxical interpretation of statistically observed experimental outcomes.
Considering a complicated extension of a Wigner's friend scenario, Frauchiger and Renner (FR) allegedly showed that "quantum theory cannot consistently describe the use of itself". However, such a result has been under severe criticism, as it has been convincingly argued to crucially depend on an implicit, non-trivial assumption regarding details of the collapse mechanism. In consequence, the result is not as robust or general as intended. On top of all this, in this work we show that a much simpler arrangement--basically an EPR setting--is sufficient to derive a result fully analogous to that of FR. Moreover, we claim that all lessons learned from FR's result are essentially contained within the original EPR paper. We conclude that FR's result does not offer any novel insights into the conceptual problems of quantum theory.
In April 2016, Daniela Frauchiger and Renato Renner published an article online in which they introduce a Gedankenexperiment that led them to conclude that single-world interpretation of quantum theory cannot be self-consistent. In a new version of the paper, published in September 2018, the authors moderate their original claim by concluding that quantum theory cannot be extrapolated to complex systems, at least not in a straightforward manner. The purpose of this article is to offer a careful reconstruction of the F-R argument, which allows us to show that: (i) the argument can be more clearly formulated with no reference to what subjects know or see, but rather only in terms of quantum propositions, (ii) in contrast to what some commentators suppose, the argument does not require the hypothesis of collapse to arrive to its conclusion, and (iii) the contradiction resulting from the F-R argument is inferred by making classical conjunctions between different and incompatible contexts. On the basis of this clarification, we will finally argue that the conclusion of the F-R argument is not as novel and original as its great impact might make us to suppose.
Wigner’s Friend and the Frauchiger-Renner paradox explore fundamental tensions in quantum mechanics, particularly how measurement, observer perspectives, and entangled states yield contradictory or paradoxical conclusions when extended universally. Conventional treatments prioritize wavefunction collapse or large-scale entanglement, often neglecting the role of partial decoherence. Here, I develop a “Wigner’s Buddy” framework that refocuses these thought experiments on quantum coherence, treating measurement as a continuous, environment-driven process rather than an abrupt collapse. By systematically quantifying off-diagonal terms through measures such as the ℓ1-norm or relative entropy of coherence, and employing techniques that measure coherence such as tomography, interferometry, and ultrafast spectroscopy, I highlight how gradual phase damping reconciles local classicality with residual global coherence. This approach surpasses limitations of fragility in entanglement-based protocols, addresses nested-observer inconsistencies without invoking universal collapse, and accommodates real-world noise in biological systems such as photosynthesis, magnetoreception. Coherence thus bridges theoretical paradoxes and practical phenomena, demonstrating a scalable mechanism by which quantum effects can persist in macroscopic or dissipative environments.In doing so, it aligns Wigner’s Friend and Frauchiger-Renner analyses with a broader spectrum of interpretative frameworks—including Copenhagen, Many-Worlds, relational, Bayesian perspectives, and pilot-wave views—while underscoring the adaptability of quantum mechanics across multiple scales and contexts. Moreover, this perspective resonates with quantum Darwinism, which posits that the environment redundantly encodes pointer states, promoting effective classical objectivity from purely quantum substrates. By clarifying how partial decoherence can stabilize measurement outcomes, the “Wigner’s Buddy” proposal enhances our understanding of quantum theory’s capacity to describe itself without logical contradictions. It also has implications for quantum computing, where maintaining and controlling coherence amid noise is pivotal for scalable information processing. Furthermore, analyzing coherence measures can, in principle, distinguish gradual phase suppression from hypothetical non-unitary collapse if robust empirical tests are devised, though interpretation remains context-dependent. Ultimately, this modification unifies theoretical paradoxes with real-world systems, suggesting that coherence-based approaches can illuminate the transition from micro-level superpositions to macro-level classicality and guide future developments in both foundational studies and emergent quantum technologies.