I am currently reading the book ''The Outer Limits of Reason'' and encountered a description about which I am very confused. I am afraid to say, this may be due to the fact that I am not a native English speaker.
On pp.226, it says:
Researchers are not in total agreement as to why we do not see things in superposition. All that is known is that when we examine the results of a quantum experiment, or to use the right lingo, when the system is measured, we no longer see a superposition. We say the system collapses from a superposition of many positions to one particular position. The measurement problem asks why this collapse occurs and is one of the major discussion points in the philosophy of quantum mechanics.
and on pp.204:
Before we leave the double-slit experiment, let us rephrase the experiment in a slightly different way. The photon leaves the light source, and then depending on whether the barrier has one or two slits open, the photon will have a position or a superposition.
and on pp.218:
Wigner takes this as proof that the only thing in the world that can collapse a superposition to a position is human consciousness.
I have some information about superposition and the Schrödinger's equation and that the word superposition itself means that the act of placing upon; the state of being placed upon.
The thing that makes me confused is the usage of "superposition" and "position" in this sentence because I don't know if there is a definition of the "position" besides the common usage of it. Is it just means a "state" and we can easily exchange them with one another and it is the style that the writer picked for, I don't know, better understanding? The kind of way that popular science writers use or are there some other relation and meaning?
I know that This is not completely a "physics" question and if you think it is inappropriate for this forum, tell me to remove it.