The egocentrism seems to be an instinctive hang-up that the humans have and that we also apply to many scientific fields and particularly in physics.
But what more confuses me is that this type of bad psychological habit is so much applied in our time.
It seems to be that while more advanced we go, more egocentric we are.
And for that, I will stand out the penultimate contributions of our more select scientists as Einstein, Heisenberg or Schrodinger.
In short I am referring to the idea of all these characters when exposing: "The whole physics events depend and undergo of our points of view and observations."
Perhaps this considerations began with the, disastrous for my, statement of Einstein when saying: The time, space, speed, etc., depend on a located observer on .........". Flatly NOT.
Then Heisenberg came to tell us that the movement of the particles was uncertain because we could not measure its real movement with our current apparatuses.
And to make worse the question, Schrodinger locked us a cat in a box and if we could not see its death for poisoning, it is that this death was uncertain or partially.
That is to say, the whole physical laws and their consequences are at the mercy and order of our observation.
Clear, as us we are the centre and order of the Universe, because we invent ourselves formulas that the Cosmos and the physics must complete without protesting, although they go against all physical law.
And subsequently to these formulas and egocentric principles we typify as laws of the quantum physics that the Universe has to complete, but of course alone there where we don't see that they are erroneous and contrary to all logic and physical principle; incredible.

This case, and in my cosmic model when I speak on the reference frames, my proposal and consideration is that:

"All the physical events have real consistency and they depend alone of the physical laws that direct and order them on the reference frames where they are executed."

But not, today we make that the probabilistic, erroneous observation and speculation are true and that the truth is virtual as often we see.

For all this, let us criticize a little to our dear scientists of the previous examples, in this case to Schrodinger mainly.

The first thing that would be necessary to say them is that our thoughts, imaginations, points of view and of observation, etc., are alone probabilistic, pre-studies and speculation; and another very different thing is the physical reality of the events.

This way, on a certain physical event, for example, the cat A of Schrodinger we say that two different things could happen, that it is alive or died; or worse, that it is alive and died at the same time. And immediately we pass to give as real all the foreseen possibilities.
That is to say, when not knowing the reality of the facts, all that we think or imagine become reality.

But let us see the example otherwise.
Let us put the cat A in a transparent box of glass with a variable particle P (50 %).
This way we see all the events directly and we can observe that a unique event occurs, always depending on the characteristics and physical properties of the P particles or variable element. So the speculative proposal of the application of the wave function would be alone possible if the box is not made of glass and we don't see what happens.
But when being of glass material the box, then the wave function became in what is really, alone as a speculative formula, applicable alone when we don't see that vary solutions at the same time are impossible.

I will give an example to understand a little the problem of the uncertainty that we say have the physical events: The flock of birds:

Let us suppose a naturalist (very lover of the quantum mechanics by the way) that is in holiday in a quite desert place with a near lake where is possible to see of entering and leaving flocks of birds continually.
This scientist, intrigued of seeing the birds, takes the little that has to its reach as a pencil and some paper to draw, going immediately to the lake to see and take note of what the birds are making.
But unfortunately, and for lack of enough vegetation that hides he, when the scientist comes closer to the lake the birds escape flying and he could not observe anything of the habits and movements of the birds.

The following day the scientist goes to see if there is more luck; but not, equally the birds fly and they escape from his observation perspective.
As day after days the problem repeats, because this scientist tries to solve the problem inventing a formula and solution to this question.
And clear as he is a scientist of the egocentric school and admirer of the quantum mechanic, because he decides to expose that the birds have an uncertain and not defined behaviour.
Also, that this question can be explained mathematically by means of a quantum formula with Cartesian coordinates applied to the lake.
In this sense he distributes the birds on the Cartesian axes towards the north, south, east and west, and also above and bottom of the lake.

And when some onlooker tells him that the birds never adopted that rare distribution, then he answers saying:
"When we don't see the birds, these don't complete their normal habit but rather they complete the laws of the quantum mechanics."
And he gives as finished his study and later his holyday.

But months later he remembers the event and decides to repeat his study being taken a photographic camera that can be camouflaged; with the one he will observe the reality of the facts.
And this way, once installed again in the old place and lake, he can camouflage the photographic camera perfectly and to record all and each one of the movements of the birds.
And his study is exhaustive and deep; being possible to observe, see and take note of any procedure of the birds: When the arrived, eat, swims, stroll for the sand, mate, time that last in their nest, who nests and who not, etc.

And what before was uncertain and not defined, now becomes well known and perfectly defined with the logic of the customs of the birds.

And the same thing that our naturalistic, Schrodinger, Heisenberg and Einstein should have placed their camera in the appropriate place to see the reality of the facts and not to subject these facts to our observation place, imagination, particular vicissitudes; nor invent imaginary and completely incongruous formulas with the real laws physics.

The physics events are made according to the physical laws, independently that we are observing them or not; that we are in such or which observation position; or that we have or not the necessary knowledge to understand this phenomena and physical facts.

Note: Our naturalistic friend still continues believing that the birds are distributed on the axes of Cartesian coordinates when the camera is retired and the birds are no longer observed.
In a same way, most of the current physicists believe that electrons and other particles alone obey the physical incongruity of the icon formula of the quantum mechanics as it is the wave function (say, to Schrodinger), and not to the gravitational forces, magnetic forces; physical laws, etc.
Even after checking that applying these laws and forces the electrons and other particles complete and obey the physical laws and their forces.

And my final question would be:
Will we have arrived to the limit of the human egocentrism in science, or do we still have to see bigger marks of mislay and scientific incongruity?.