As I understand it, for the external observer, the box+clairobscur system is in superposition - it is this system that collapses into the state box+living_clairobscur when opened.
Si
Look, I’m a bit simple. Surely the cat/person in the box is actually alive or dead, we just won’t know which it is until the box is opened. The only answer to the question, “What is the state of the occupant” prior to opening the box is, “Could be dead or alive, dunno.” I can’t escape the feeling that it’s a contrived bullshit question that can only be answered by a contrived bullshit answer. But like I said, I’m a bit simple.
What if I open the box and look, but don’t tell you what I see? Is there then a box+clairobscur+Gyrate system that has yet to collapse?
If we ensure that you forget what you saw, yes (quantum eraser experiment). How we do that, well … 
It is contrived, deliberately so. But it reflects a problem quantum physicists had - quantum particles definitely behaved in an indeterminate manner, whereas macroscopic objects did not. Schrödinger created the Cat thought experiment to show how the Copenhagen interpretation failed at that scale, to prompt discussion and other theories. Physicists are still arguing about the theories, but are managing to demonstrate macroscopic systems that do exhibit superposition.
Si
The Dead Collector: Bring out yer dead.
Schrodinger: Here’s one.
The Dead Collector: That’ll be ninepence.
Cat: I’m not dead.
The Dead Collector: What?
Schrodinger: Nothing. There’s your ninepence.
Cat: I’m not dead.
The Dead Collector: 'Ere, he says he’s not dead.
Schrodinger: He kind of is.
Cat: I’m not.
The Dead Collector: He isn’t.
Schrodinger: Well, he will be soon – just don’t look at him.
Cat: I’m getting better.
Schrodinger: No you’re not, you’re in superposition.
The Dead Collector: Well, I can’t take him like that. It’s against regulations.
Cat: I don’t want to go on the cart.
Schrodinger: Oh, don’t be such a baby.
The Dead Collector: I can’t take him.
Cat: I feel fine.
Schrodinger: Oh, do me a favor.
The Dead Collector: I can’t.
Schrodinger: Well, can you hang around for a couple of minutes? He won’t be long as long as people stop peeking.
The oscillator was in a superposition of either having a single quantum of vibrational energy (a phonon) or having none. This caused it’s position to be uncertain by a value well below the diameter of an atom. Visible light gives too fuzzy an image to resolve the oscillator’s position that finely; and if you could use something like gamma ray photons, they would pump enough energy into the system to destroy the superposition. So no, no one saw the oscillator in a ghostly half-there mode.
ETA: what’s significant is that we could see an object that we knew was in a state of superposition, and by a value that although tiny was still orders of magnitude larger than the ordinary uncertainy of an object of that mass.
What if the cat is put in a tiny little plane, and this plane is put on a tiny little treadmill, all inside the box of course. Will the plane both fly and not fly?
Is there a tiny snake on the tiny plane?
I dunno, but you just made me lose the Game too, you bastard.
The cat, from its point of view, never dies. [Quantum Immortality]
I don’t know nuthin’ ‘bout nuthin’, (this girl just found out last night that Plato has math in 'im), but, I have a suggestion to make anyway…
Can’t we just assume that it’s only our current powers of observation and or conclusion drawing ability that make the quantum particles disappear/do that voodoo that they do?
There is no “super-position”, there is no “existence/non-existence”. There is only “us/baby”, and the “particles/rattle”, being hidden behind the “other particles/blanket” by “God(Universe)/Mommy”.
There is only one possible universe, everything that has ever existed still exists in some form, it is only our perception of things that changes.
That depends. There must be some threshold of interpretive capacity that distinguishes “effective” observation, collapsing the quantum waveform, from mere physical proximity. Maybe cats meet it, maybe not.
Really? Is there published theory to this effect?
Yes, and a tiny badger, and a tiny Samuel L.
I always suspected Schrodinger of overly complicating the issue by choosing a cat for the test subject. Not only must one determine if the cat has been killed, but also whether it has suffered eight other deaths prior to the experiment…
This is the Hidden Variable Theory - basically, there are variables influencing quantum behaviour that we have not characterised and taken into account. Experiments seem to show that local hidden variables cannot influence quantum results, so the evidence seems to be against it.
Si
This might help:
I don’t usually jump into deep threads like this, but I have a genuine question.
Considering relativity and spacetime, wouldn’t all of the 4 superposition states be true?
later, Tom.
Thank-you for the link, interesting, and I DO like being able to agree with Einstein on a subject that I know virtually nothing else about, but…meh…I’m just going to go on tripping through life assuming that there are ways of explaining quantum “stuff” that we just don’t know, ways of observing these things that we just aren’t privy to, yet.
Baby and Mommy are having fun with the rattle and blanket…
Too late.