I was reading up on Quantum Non-locality last night and learned that by virtue of entanglement one can learn of a system without interacting with a system directly. I used the Schrodinger's cat analogy to explain this.

Imagine that there are three systems:

Cat A, Cat B, and Me; C

Let us assume that cat A and cat B are entangled. Both cats are present deadalive. Let's now say that I as system C, interacts with system A and open the box to find that System A, namely cat A is dead. Knowing that the cats are entangled I can deduce that System B, namely cat B, is now alive. I have collapsed the wave function of System B as System C, without directly interacting with System B being myself System C. What concerns me of this is that System B is not aware of me, System C and has no awareness as to my state, but I do of it.

Does this suggest that the uncertainty principle is violated between System B and C? By definition without observing that system I cannot determinately know for sure if the cat is dead or alive yet because I know system A is dead I know that system B is alive.

I want to expand on this using Everett's many worlds interpretation and say that instead of the following possibilities:

System A is Alive and System B is Dead.

System A is Dead and System B is Dead.

System B is Dead and System A is Alive.

System A is Alive and System B is Alive.

In a lineally interacting way with no entanglement I would theoretically only be able to see a split in the universe when interacting with with either box, in other words 4 possible probabilities as to the reality of each box with a universe for each box, but when they are entangled we have only two:

System A is Alive and System B is Dead.

System A is Dead and System B is Alive.

This reduces the possible 'many worlds' when the systems are entangled. Does this suggest that Quantum Entanglement reduces the number of universes in the many worlds interpretation? Would this also not mean that there are NOT an infinite number of universes?

What is current understanding from scientific institutions on this? Or have I just added something new here? Not quite sure!