That's the way most of the books
you get would have you see it. Observation ... by who? By what? A fish? Most of the books I've read seem to imply that comprehention of what's been observed makes all the difference. That's why I asked the question about whether they have a drum to beat.
You would think Shrodinger would have made it very clear what exactly it was that he WASN'T saying. Yes? But no.
But then again, I'm 10 or 12 years removed from where we are now.