There’s an interpretation that keeps observer as the central element. It is not as popular as many worlds or Copenhagen but I find it very intriguing. Check out

There’s an interpretation that keeps observer as the central element. It is not as popular as many worlds or Copenhagen but I find it very intriguing. Check out QBism: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_Bayesianism?wprov=sfti1 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_Bayesianism?wprov=sf... In QBism, the Born rule is normative in that it tells the observer which observations to bet on, and observations are data points to update the observer’s subjective assessment of outcomes. Taking this perspective, a lot of paradoxes in QM seem to get resolved trivially. It’s controversial for sure but mathematically it’s rigorous.