The experiment began again, and Professor Yang first took the fourth half-lens. The assistant activates the button, emits a photon, and the photon reaches the first half-lens, is it reflected or transmitted? No one knows, the semilens gives it an answer at random. To know this answer, it is necessary to rely on the observations of experimenter A and experimenter B. Whichever line the photon is found, the photon is the line taken. According to the classical acquaintance, the photons were already there before the experimenter's observations. No matter which route the photon takes, it must be at a certain position on a certain line at some point before the experimenter observes it. If Experimenter A sees a photon in the horizontal direction, the photon will follow a reflection route when it passes through the half-lens; If Experimenter B sees a photon in the vertical direction, the photon passes through the half-lens in a transmission route. The experimental results confirm that if there is only one half-lens, the probability of seeing a photon in both directions is half of the probability, indicating that the photon has only taken one route.

Professor Yang attached a second half-lens to the upper right, and the assistant repeated the experiment in the same way. When the photon reaches the second half-lens, it is reflected or transmitted. If the photon takes only one route, then the photon will not interfere, and the probability of receiving the photon is 50% for Experimenter A and Experimenter B. Tennis experiments have shown that when a fourth board with a mechanism is fitted, if the tennis ball takes only one path when reflected or transmitted, the probability of receiving the tennis ball is indeed 50% for each of the two experimenters.

The experiment continued. If the photons pass through the first half-lens and come from two lines at the same time, when they reach the second half-lens, they will be mixed together, and both experimenter A and experimenter B can see the photons coming from both paths at the same time, which can cause interference. Professor Yang carefully adjusted the position of the second half-lens, so that the light phase of experimenter A is opposite, and the energy is offset and disappears, and at the same time, the light phase of experimenter B is the same, and the energy is superimposed and enhanced, which is equivalent to the light and dark fringes in the electron double-slit experiment, and the two mirrors are equivalent to the double-slit test.

What are the results of this beamsplitter? The probability that the two experimenters will receive a photon is 50 percent? Or is there a probability that one will receive a photon with zero and the other with a 100 percent probability of receiving a photon? If it is the former, it means that the photon is taking the same route. If it is the latter, it means that the photon took two routes at the same time.

After repeated experiments, Prof. Yang found that photons were always 100% received by Experimenter B. Experiments have confirmed that photons do take two routes.

"It's strange that without a second half-lens, the photon only took one route; There is a second half-lens, and the photon takes two routes. Hu Kehao said.

"I feel like there's a reason for that. Without a second half-lens, the experimenter was able to detect which route the photon had taken, and the photon's whereabouts were completely leaked, so its wave function collapsed and could only take one route; If there is a second half-lens, assuming that the photon can only take one route, since both half-lenses have the possibility of reflection or transmission, the experimenter ultimately does not know which route the observed photon comes from, and the photon's whereabouts are not leaked, so the wave function does not collapse, so there is no need for the photon to take only one route, so it is not necessary for the photon to take only one route, so he takes two routes at the same time. Professor Yang said.

"Is the whereabouts of the photon leaked, and is it related to whether the wave function of the photon collapses?" Hu Kehao asked.

"Probably. As soon as the human consciousness knows the whereabouts of the photon or the whereabouts of the photon is leaked, the wave function collapses. Professor Yang said.

"Can you do this, first use only a half lens, so that the photons only take one route. When the photons are about to reach the second half-lens, we put the second half-lens on again. The path taken by the photon cannot be changed, and when it reaches the second half-lens, does it take one route or two? If Photon decides to take two routes, the road ahead has already been taken, so should it be retaken? Is there a turning back in the world? If the photon decides to take a route, how does it face the second half-lens in front? Because the previous experiments confirmed that as long as there is a second half-lens, the photon must go two ways. Hu Kehao said.

"You're talking about the 'delayed experiment' proposed by John Heeler, Einstein's colleague John Heeler, one of Bohr's close colleagues, at a symposium held in Princeton in 1979 on the 100th anniversary of his birth. Professor Yang said.

Professor Yang did follow the idea of the Wheeler experiment and carried out the delay experiment. It turns out that when the photon passes through the first half-lens, only one route is chosen, and when the second half-lens is inserted near the end of the line, the photon will instantly change its decision, and the one route it took when passing the first half-lens becomes two. In other words: the history of the movement of photons has changed! We can decide how it should happen after it happens! If we are the directors of this good show, then what role our photons play in it can be decided after the film is made!

Professor Yang's delay experiment has once again changed the "law of cause and effect". When he was conducting the Schrödinger cat experiment, the soul of the woman who died in the car accident observed that the Schrödinger cat was dead, and he opened the secret room to find that the Schrödinger cat was still alive, and the law of cause and effect had been broken by Professor Yang's experiment. Professor Yang pondered how these experiments should be interpreted.

From this point of view, is the interpretation of the Copenhagen School correct?

The Copenhagen School believes that before our observations, there is no physical quantity, that is, the photon is not in any one path, it has no position, no path, no momentum and any other physical quantity, it is not a real existence, so there is no "history" because it has not happened yet, it is just a superposition of countless possibilities. Only when we observe can a photon become a photon, and history will have a supporting script. There is a second half-lens, and the results of the interference are observed, and the supporting history is to take two paths; Without a second half-lens, the result is obtained without interference, and the supporting history is to take one path. In other words, our current observations can make history! There is no need to cross, just choose the means of observation, and we can influence history! What a thunderous man!

Judging by the results of the experiments so far, it is likely to be the most reliable. Note that "most reliable" must be preceded by "most likely". Because, in the future, there are other theories that can also explain these phenomena.

Before the observation, there was no objective reality, only a myriad of possible superimpositions. Only when observed, can the wave function be reduced to objective reality. So, who is going to observe? Experiments have shown that the instrument does not work, but we can. As a result, von Neumann, Wigner, Wheeler and others gave an astonishing judgment: consciousness can make the wave function collapse into reality. Just like Song Huiqin's consciousness tracks the wave function in the fourth dimensional supernatural space, even if there is no photon observation perturbation, as long as the information is leaked to people and people are "aware", the wave function will collapse! After collapse, it is no longer a "wave" but a "particle", and the interference of waves cannot occur.

What exactly is consciousness? Is consciousness a thing or not? We can only assume that "consciousness" is a thing, a material act. Because what can interact and react with matter can only be matter. Unless you can prove some mysterious "miracle" with rigorous, reproducible scientific experiments.

According to the Copenhagen School's explanation: before the emergence of consciousness, there was no universe, only the wave function. It is only when consciousness first appears that it collapses into the real world. Since there is the world in front of us, then there needs to be the origin of this world, yes, you guessed it, it is not only the present and the present that collapse, but also the history - your observations determine history! It was conscious observation that created the universe! This...... Isn't it the "idealism" that everyone shouts about?