Suppose $^\dagger$ we have absolutely no knowledge of a hydrogen atom. It is well isolated. And we put a photon detector next to it (and pretty sure it has no interaction with the hydrogen atom.)

Now suppose now the detector receives a photon with a specific frequency, which indicates the hydrogen atom was at a specific energy eigenstate {$n'$}, and now, {$n'-1$}.

The question is: could the hydrogen atom be in a superposition of energy eigenstates?

If yes $^{\dagger\dagger}$, then since the specific frequency indicates that the hydrogen atom now is in a specific energy eigenstate; therefore, it must have been experiencing a wavefunction collapse. And since we premised no interaction or whatsoever (there is only a equally well isolated detector next to the hydrogen atom, or rather we could place the detector $3\cdot 10^8m$ far away... ); therefore, there must be a spontaneous wavefunction collapse.

I wonder, what are the problems with my thought experiement? $^{\dagger\dagger\dagger}$

$\dagger :$I am attempting to show that wavefunction collapse spontaneously; however, I am looking for the flaw of it, as I have just learned my undergrad quantum physics last school year, so I probably missed something here.

$\dagger\dagger$: I have asked this question to some people and place, and I was told yes. So, I will just assume yes here.

$\dagger\dagger\dagger$ : I have asked a question here, and have also read that spontaneous wavefunction collapse is nearly impossible. so I wonder what are the flaws in my thought experiment? Here are a few guesses of mine:

1.) I basically assume measurement is about interaction, however, it can be related to entanglement. I wonder if it is exactly the flaw.

2.) On the other hand. I read a article some time ago, it basically says the whole thing about emitting photon is deterministic, and has something to do with field; however, sadly, I do not quite understand the article, but I doubt it also possibly be the problems with my thought experiment.

Would anyone be kind enough to shed some light on this matter?

Suppose $^\dagger$ we have absolutely no knowledge of a hydrogen atom. It is well isolated. And we put a photon detector next to it (and pretty sure it has no interaction with the hydrogen atom.)

Now suppose now the detector receives a photon with a specific frequency, which indicates the hydrogen atom was at a specific energy eigenstate {$n'$}, and now, {$n'-1$}.

The question is: could the hydrogen atom be in a superposition of energy eigenstates?

If yes $^{\dagger\dagger}$, then since the specific frequency indicates that the hydrogen atom now is in a specific energy eigenstate; therefore, it must have been experiencing a wavefunction collapse. And since we premised no interaction or whatsoever (there is only a equally well isolated detector next to the hydrogen atom, or rather we could place the detector $3\cdot 10^8m$ far away... ); therefore, there must be a spontaneous wavefunction collapse.

I wonder, what are the problems with my thought experiement? $^{\dagger\dagger\dagger}$

$\dagger :$I am attempting to show that wavefunction collapse spontaneously; however, I am looking for the flaw of it, as I have just learned my undergrad quantum physics last school year, so I probably missed something here.

$\dagger\dagger$: I have asked this question to some people and place, and I was told yes. So, I will just assume yes here.

$\dagger\dagger\dagger$ : I have asked a question here, and have also read that spontaneous wavefunction collapse is nearly impossible. so I wonder what are the flaws in my thought experiment? Here are a few guesses of mine:

1.) I basically assume measurement is about interaction, however, it can be related to entanglement. I wonder if it is exactly the flaw.

2.) On the other hand. I read a article some time ago, it basically says the whole thing about emitting photon is deterministic, and has something to do with field; however, sadly, I do not quite understand the article, but I doubt it also possibly be the problems with my thought experiment.

Would anyone be kind enough to shed some light on this matter?

Suppose $^\dagger$ we have absolutely no knowledge of a hydrogen atom. It is well isolated. And we put a photon detector next to it (and pretty sure it has no interaction with the hydrogen atom.)

Now suppose now the detector receives a photon with a specific frequency, which indicates the hydrogen atom was at a specific energy eigenstate {$n'$}, and now, {$n'-1$}.

The question is: could the hydrogen atom be in a superposition of energy eigenstates?

If yes $^{\dagger\dagger}$, then since the specific frequency indicates that the hydrogen atom now is in a specific energy eigenstate; therefore, it must have been experiencing a wavefunction collapse. And since we premised no interaction or whatsoever (there is only a equally well isolated detector next to the hydrogen atom, or rather we could place the detector $3\cdot 10^8m$ far away... ); therefore, there must be a spontaneous wavefunction collapse.

I wonder, what are the problems with my thought experiement? $^{\dagger\dagger\dagger}$

$\dagger :$I am attempting to show that wavefunction collapse spontaneously; however, I am looking for the flaw of it, as I have just learned my undergrad quantum physics last school year, so I probably missed something here. (frankly, I still don't understand many thing taught last year...)

$\dagger\dagger$: I have asked this question to some people and place, and I was told yes. So, I will just assume yes here.

$\dagger\dagger\dagger$ : I have asked a question here, and have also read that spontaneous wavefunction collapse is nearly impossible. so I wonder what are the flaws in my thought experiment? Here are a few guesses of mine:

1.) I basically assume measurement is about interaction, however, it can be related to entanglement. I wonder if it is exactly the flaw.

2.) On the other hand. I read a article some time ago, it basically says the whole thing about emitting photon is deterministic, and has something to do with field; however, sadly, I do not quite understand the article, but I doubt it also possibly be the problems with my thought experiment.

Would anyone be kind enough to shed some light on this matter?

Suppose $^\dagger$ we have absolutely no knowledge of a hydrogen atom. It is well isolated. And we put a photon detector next to it (and pretty sure it has no interaction with the hydrogen atom.)

Now suppose now the detector receives a photon with a specific frequency, which indicates the hydrogen atom was at a specific energy eigenstate {$n'$}, and now, {$n'-1$}.

The question is: could the hydrogen atom be in a superposition of energy eigenstates?

If yes $^{\dagger\dagger}$, then since the specific frequency indicates that the hydrogen atom now is in a specific energy eigenstate; therefore, it must have been experiencing a wavefunction collapse. And since we premised no interaction or whatsoever (there is only a equally well isolated detector next to the hydrogen atom, or rather we could place the detector $3\cdot 10^8m$ far away... ); therefore, there must be a spontaneous wavefunction collapse.

I wonder, what are the problems with my thought experiement? $^{\dagger\dagger\dagger}$

$\dagger :$I am attempting to show that wavefunction collapse spontaneously; however, I am looking for the flaw of it, as I have just learned my undergrad quantum physics last school year, so I probably missed something here.

$\dagger\dagger$: I have asked this question to some people and place, and I was told yes. So, I will just assume yes here.

$\dagger\dagger\dagger$ : I have asked a question here, and have also read that spontaneous wavefunction collapse is nearly impossible. so I wonder what are the flaws in my thought experiment? Here are a few guesses of mine:

1.) I basically assume measurement is about interaction, however, it can be related to entanglement. I wonder if it is exactly the flaw.

2.) On the other hand. I read a article some time ago, it basically says the whole thing about emitting photon is deterministic, and has something to do with field; however, sadly, I do not quite understand the article, but I doubt it also possibly be the problems with my thought experiment.

Would anyone be kind enough to shed some light on this matter?