Article  Cosmic paradox reveals the awful consequence of an observer-free universe

#1
C C Offline
https://www.quantamagazine.org/cosmic-pa...e-20251119

EXCERPTS: Tinkering at their desks with the mathematics of quantum space and time, physicists have discovered a puzzling conundrum. The arcane rules of quantum theory and gravity let them imagine many different kinds of universes in precise detail, enabling powerful thought experiments that in recent years have addressed long-standing mysteries swirling around black holes.

But when a group of researchers examined a universe intriguingly like our own in 2019, they found a paradox: The theoretical universe seemed to admit only a single possible state. It appeared so simple that its contents could be described without conveying even a single bit of data, not even a choice of a zero or a one. This result clashed with the fact that this type of universe should be capable of hosting black holes, stars, planets — and people. Yet all those rich details were nowhere to be seen.

“We look around, and certainly the world seems more complex than that,” said Rob Myers(opens a new tab), a theoretical physicist at the Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics in Waterloo, Canada, who has not been directly involved in this research.

Physicists have good reason to trust the calculation, which builds on fundamental physical ideas. The math implies a universe with only one state; our universe is clearly not like that. Now a team of theorists has floated a possible answer. The paradoxical result occurred when physicists sought an objective description of the state of an entire universe. But a description like that might not be possible, even in principle. It implicitly assumes a universe that exists without an observer to observe it. And perhaps without observers, the complexity of the universe loses its meaning.

[...] The situation presents a paradox: Calculations consistently imply that any closed universe has only one possible state. But our universe, which may very well be closed, seems infinitely more complex. So what’s going on?

In a 2023 essay(opens a new tab), Shaghoulian noted that physicists had seen this strange behavior before in theories called topological field theories. Mathematicians use these theories to chart the shape, or topology, of geometric spaces. Topological field theories can also have one-dimensional Hilbert spaces. But if you split up the geometric space into multiple zones, you can describe the space in many different ways. To keep track of all the new possibilities, you need a bigger Hilbert space.

“The rules of the game change,” Shaghoulian said. Shaghoulian proposed that there might be a similar way to split up a closed universe: Bring in an observer.

Quantum mechanics requires a distinction between an observer — such as the scientist carrying out an experiment — and the system they observe. The system tends to be something small and quantum, like an atom. The observer is big and far away, and thus well described by classical physics. Shaghoulian observed that this split was analogous to the kind that enlarges the Hilbert spaces of topological field theories. Perhaps an observer could do the same to these closed, impossibly simple-seeming universes?

In 2024, Zhao moved to the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, where she began to work on the problem of how to put an observer into a closed universe. She and two colleagues —Daniel Harlow and Mykhaylo Usatyuk — thought of the observer as introducing a new kind of boundary: not the edge of the universe, but the boundary of the observer themself. When you consider a classical observer inside a closed universe, all the complexity of the world returns, Zhao and her collaborators showed.

The MIT team’s paper came out at the beginning of 2025, around the same time that another group came forward with a similar idea. Others chimed in to point out connections to earlier work.

At this stage, everyone involved emphasizes that they don’t know the full solution. The paradox itself may be a misunderstanding, one that evaporates with a new argument. But so far, adding an observer to the closed universe and trying to account for their presence may be the safest path... (MORE - missing details)
Reply
#2
Magical Realist Online
Quote:In 2024, Zhao moved to the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, where she began to work on the problem of how to put an observer into a closed universe. She and two colleagues —Daniel Harlow and Mykhaylo Usatyuk — thought of the observer as introducing a new kind of boundary: not the edge of the universe, but the boundary of the observer themself. When you consider a classical observer inside a closed universe, all the complexity of the world returns, Zhao and her collaborators showed.

It brings home the whole notion that any closed and coherent system is doomed to stasis and redundancy without there being an outside source--be it an observer or other mathematical laws that that system presupposes. It's the physicalist counterpart to the idealist's solipsism. And it's also the physics equivalent to Godel's incompleteness theory. That only an open-ended system has the creativity to become as complex and ultimately unpredictable as the universe we find ourselves in. The observer always stands outside the system they are seeking to describe and formulate, fundamentally beyond all the laws and principles that define that system.
Reply


Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Article The physics that reveals the universe could be destroyed in a blink C C 1 423 Oct 12, 2025 10:32 PM
Last Post: Magical Realist
  Research 'Dark force' theory could solve 2 open cosmic mysteries C C 0 384 Dec 10, 2023 10:55 PM
Last Post: C C
  Article Math changed shape of gerrymandering + Bernard Carr: physics of the observer C C 0 404 Jun 5, 2023 04:30 PM
Last Post: C C
  Twin Paradox without acceleration confused2 13 2,106 Jan 18, 2023 01:04 PM
Last Post: Kornee
  Crisis of quantum gravity + Has the black hole information paradox evaporated? C C 0 500 Mar 24, 2021 05:32 PM
Last Post: C C
  Cosmic global warming C C 0 397 Nov 11, 2020 01:04 AM
Last Post: C C
  Dissolving the Fermi Paradox + An infinite universe of number systems C C 2 731 Oct 21, 2020 11:06 AM
Last Post: Zinjanthropos
  Wigner's paradox points to shaky foundations of reality + Twistors & a unified theory C C 0 556 Aug 18, 2020 02:41 AM
Last Post: C C
  Has reductionism run its course? + 'Quantum foam' may explain away huge cosmic energy C C 1 660 Oct 7, 2019 09:15 PM
Last Post: Magical Realist
  The Wave/Particle Paradox Secular Sanity 29 8,557 Feb 20, 2019 11:25 PM
Last Post: Syne



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)