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.

考虑到维格纳朋友场景的复杂扩展，弗劳奇格和伦纳（FR）声称表明“量子理论不能始终如一地描述其自身的使用。” 但是，这样的结果受到了严厉的批评，因为已经令人信服地认为它至关重要地依赖于关于崩溃机制细节的隐含，非平凡的假设。结果，结果不如预期的那样稳健或通用。最重要的是，在这项工作中，我们证明了一种简单得多的安排（基本上是EPR设置）足以得出与FR完全相似的结果。此外，我们声称从FR的结果中学到的所有教训基本上都包含在原始EPR文件中。我们得出的结论是，FR的结果并未提供任何有关量子理论概念问题的新颖见解。