3
I recently came across a theory from Japan that tries to rethink physics from the standpoint of the observer. (fedia.io)
submitted 1 month ago by BlueberryAlice@fedia.io to c/philosophy@lemmy.world
25 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I recently came across a theory from Japan that tries to rethink physics from the standpoint of the observer.

Instead of treating reality as something fully given “out there,” it suggests that reality may emerge when certain structural conditions of the observer are satisfied.

What I found interesting is that it reframes the gap between relativity and quantum mechanics as a problem about how the observer is defined.

Philosophically, it feels closely related to the question of whether observation is passive or constitutive of reality.

It’s summarized in a short video, so if you’re interested, I’d really appreciate your thoughts: https://notebooklm.google.com/notebook/c714dc8c-eb93-4317-b369-8e57fac880fc?artifac

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] blackbrook@mander.xyz 5 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Does this person have any peer-reviewed papers? They all seem to be on ResearchGate or academia.edu. According to his profile on the former, his credentials are a bachelor of business administration, and being "founder of SIEL subjectivity intersection emergence lab". This is not super confidence inducing.

It seems the foundational evidence for his theories is his "Non local EEG-Quantum Experiment" which claims to find correlations between EEGs and the outputs of a distant cloud quantum computer. I haven't looked at the details but my concern would be that if you look broadly enough for some pattern in data you will certainly find one.

[-] BlueberryAlice@fedia.io 1 points 1 month ago

@blackbrook@mander.xyz

I understand that concern—I’ve received similar comments about the lack of peer review.

However, I believe peer review is meaningful only when there are experts who are capable of evaluating the work in detail. In this case, the theory is quite new, and there are currently no researchers working within the same framework who could properly review it.

It’s true that the main empirical basis is the nonlocal EEG–quantum experiment. But according to the papers, what is observed goes beyond just finding “some correlation” in data—the correlations appear under specific structural conditions, which is what led to the development of the theory.

Also, instead of relying on peer review at this stage, the experimental methods and procedures are fully disclosed in detail. The author explicitly states that anyone can attempt to replicate the experiment.

So if there is skepticism, the idea is: rather than just debating it conceptually, it can actually be tested directly.

this post was submitted on 04 Apr 2026
3 points (58.8% liked)

Philosophy

1853 readers
3 users here now

Discussion of philosophy

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
metic@lemmy.world