Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Log inSign up
Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Blog
Job Board
Q3AS

© 2026 Aqora Quantum S.A.S.

TermsPrivacyLegal Notice

Retrocausality, Wheeler's Delayed Choice, and Simulation Theory, Reinterpreted Via The Participatory Universe, 'it from bit', Time Travel and the Everett/Wheeler Hypothesis

Marshall Barnes

Published Jan 1, 2016• 0 citations
Publisher

Abstract

Abstract This paper will deal specifically with the concept of extending some of the contentions and theories of John Archibald Wheeler into a more complete description of reality, supported in part by physical experiments. The subjects that will be dealt with are well known from quantum theory, and now lately - Nick Bostrom's simulation theory, but will be seen through a new reinterpretation that connects seamlessly, prior positions of Wheeler into a self-consistent model that defines the nature of the physical universe through the convergence of information universe models and the Everett/Wheeler hypothesis. Hints will be given, as to how the reported desires of so-called Silicon Valley billionaires to leave the simulated universe, can be fulfilled using on-the-horizon technology to accomplish time travel through the manipulation of the information based fabric underpinning reality. In whole, the following will be major points discussed: 1. J.A. Wheeler posited that even the greatest mathematical equation in the universe is missing something, the principle by which can become real. He also said, no phenomenon is a phenomenon until is an observed phenomenon. 2. Wheeler developed his theory of it from bit, explaining that the physical world was based upon information at a fundamental level 3. Seth Lloyd, taking that thought further, said that the universe acts like a giant computer processing the information contained therein. 4. Nick Bostrom posited that, in fact, our universe is a computer simulation created by our post-human descendants in the distant future. 5. Philip K. Dick science fiction writer and visionary, in his 1977 public statements mentioned, that due to to events in the past being reprogrammed, things in the present could be changed so that an alternate universe splits off. 6. The universe is participatory, not just with humans, but everything else. *Just as various events cause a variety of phenomena, in the extreme cases, the universe responds in the extreme by producing alternate universes. This process resolves many of the issues related to quantum phenomena, parallel universes and time travel* 7. The detection of a simulated universe and escape therefrom is similar but not the same as doing so with an information universe. Escape from a simulated universe is impossible just as its detection may be. However, in this paper, a series of experiments will be presented that for the first time ever, establish such a possible detection as well as the method of ultimate escape from our information based universe.

DOI
10.13140/rg.2.2.11121.89445

Related papers

The Tao of It and Bit

Ovidiu Cristinel Stoica

The main mystery of quantum mechanics is contained in Wheeler's delayed choice experiment, which shows that the past is determined by our choice of what quantum property to observe. This gives the observer a participatory role in deciding the past history of the universe. Wheeler extended this participatory role to the emergence of the physical laws ("law without law"). Since what we know about the universe comes in yes/no answers to our interrogations, this led him to the idea of "it from bit" (which includes the participatory role of the observer as a key component). The yes/no answers to our observations ("bit") should always be compatible with the existence of at least a possible reality - a global solution ("it") of the Schrodinger equation. I argue that there is in fact an interplay between "it" and "bit". The requirement of global consistency leads to apparently acausal and nonlocal behavior, explaining the weirdness of quantum phenomena. As an interpretation of Wheeler's "it from bit" and "law without law", I discuss the possibility that the universe is mathematical, and that there is a "mother of all possible worlds" - named the "Axiom Zero".

arXiv:1311.0765•Nov 4, 2013•0 citations

The Universe as a Cyclic Organized Information System: John Wheeler’s World Revisited

Dirk K. F. Meijer

This essay highlights the scientific vision of John Archibald Wheeler, a giant of 20th century physics. His ideas provided the important insight that humanity may be in the very center of disclosure and manifestation of the evolution of our universe. This on the basis of scientific reasoning derived from quantum physics rather than simple anthropocentrism or scale chauvinism. Wheeler, the Joseph Henry Professor of Physics Emeritus at Princeton University, became 96. Over a long, productive scientific life, he was known for his drive to address big, overarching questions in physics, subjects which he liked to say merged with philosophical questions about the origin of matter, information and the universe. His interests ranged far and wide and were characterized by true fearlessness. Wheeler's work was not only in gravity and nuclear physics. In the 1950s Wheeler grew increasingly intrigued by the philosophical implications of quantum physics. According to Wheeler, there was no universe until the rise of consciousness to perceive it. In fact, Wheeler was one of the first prominent physicists seriously to propose that reality might not be a wholly physical phenomenon. In some sense, Wheeler suggested, reality grows out of the act of observation, and thus consciousness itself: it is participatory. He also stated that information is the most fundamental building block of reality, and that the universe should be seen as a self-synthesized information system: a self-excited circuit that is developing through a (closed loop) cycle. His cosmic variant of the delayed choice experiment led to the idea that human observers may not only determine the present, but also may influence the past. According to Wheeler, ultimate mutability is the central feature of physics, and the meaning of reality can only be established if there is a universal knowledge field, that transcend physical past, present and future.

NeuroQuantology•Nov 24, 2014•10 citations

Why the quantum? “It” from “bit”? A participatory universe? Three far-reaching challenges from John Archibald Wheeler and their relation to experiment

Anton Zeilinger

Introduction First a word of thanks. When I first came across the papers of John Archibald Wheeler on the foundations of quantum mechanics, most of them reprinted in Wheeler and Zurek (1983), I could not believe what I read. Finally here was a colleague of worldwide reputation, given his many contributions to theoretical physics, who was not afraid to discuss openly the conceptual problems of quantum mechanics. The outstanding feature of Professor Wheeler's viewpoint is his realization that the implications of quantum mechanics are so far-reaching that they require a completely novel approach in our view of reality and in the way we see our role in the universe. This distinguishes him from many others who in one way or another tried to save pre-quantum viewpoints, particularly the obviously wrong notion of a reality independent of us. Particularly remarkable is Professor Wheeler's austerity in thinking. He tries to use as few concepts as possible and to build on this the whole of physics. A fascinating case in point is the title of one of his papers “Law without law,” the attempt to arrive at the laws of nature without assuming any law a priori. For me personally his work on fundamental issues in quantum mechanics has been particularly inspiring. The questions he raises are exceptionally far-reaching and some of his concepts in the foundations of physics are so radical that calling them revolutionary would not do them justice.

Cambridge University Press eBooks•Apr 22, 2004•58 citations

Are We Living in a Simulation? What Quantum Physics and Advaita Vedanta Both Suggest

Narayan Rout

This article examines the simulation hypothesis (Bostrom N, Philosophical Quarterly 2003, 53(211):243-255), quantum physics evidence for observer-dependent and computational reality, and Advaita Vedanta’s Maya framework as three independent bodies of thought suggesting that ordinary physical reality does not have the independent, objective existence attributed to it. Simulation Hypothesis: Bostrom’s trilemma (extinction before maturity / loss of interest in simulations / we are simulated); statistical argument for simulated consciousness majority; Elon Musk popularisation; David Chalmers’ Reality+ (2022) — simulation as genuine reality. Quantum Physics evidence: (1) Quantisation at Planck scale (Planck length 1.616×10⁻³⁵ m; Planck time 5.39×10⁻⁴⁴ s) suggesting discrete computational substrate; (2) Observer-dependent wavefunction collapse — measurement problem — Copenhagen interpretation: reality constituted by observation; (3) Quantum entanglement and non-locality: Bell’s theorem (Bell 1964); Aspect et al. (1982); Hensen et al. loophole-free test (Nature 2015) — non-local correlations inconsistent with local hidden variables, consistent with shared underlying data structure; (4) Holographic principle: Bekenstein-Hawking entropy area proportionality (→ TQS-2026-211); ’t Hooft (1993); Susskind (1995); Maldacena AdS/CFT (1997): 3D physics as projection of 2D information; (5) Fine-tuning of physical constants — naturalness of parameter-setting in computational framework; (6) Wheeler’s ‘it from bit’ (participatory universe); Tegmark’s Mathematical Universe Hypothesis (2008). Advaita Vedanta: Maya (superimposition/adhyasa of apparent independence on Brahman); Vivartavada (Shankaracharya) — world as apparent transformation; Gaudapada’s Ajata-vada (non-origination: the world never truly began); Mandukya Upanishad four states; rope-snake analogy (rajju-sarpa nyaya); dream analogy (svapna drishthanta); Brahman as consciousness-substrate; Ishvara as cosmic projector; Tat tvam asi (you are That) — Jiva identical to Brahman. Three-way convergence table: computational nature, observer’s constitutive role, non-locality/non-duality, projection from more fundamental reality, consciousness as primary, resolution/liberation/escape. Critical differences: substrate (physical computer vs. consciousness); relation of beings to substrate (separate vs. identical); existence of external creator; radical depth of Ajata-vada vs. simulation theory. Governing thesis: all three frameworks converge on the inadequacy of the commonsense view of physical reality as independent, objective, and self-sustaining. Advaita’s framework is both the oldest and, in its implications for the nature of consciousness and the identity of the individual with the substrate, the most radical.

•Aug 12, 2026•0 citations

Causality and observation

George Jaroszkiewicz

Introduction Throughout this book we have commented on the need to have a wider vision of physics as more than merely developing and solving equations of motion for states of systems under observation (SUOs). It is our premise that any attempt to discuss time needs to address issues such as the status of observers, apparatus, and suchlike, relative to those states of SUOs. This echoes the following quote from Wheeler: Stronger than the anthropic principle is what I might call the participatory principle. According to it we could not even imagine a universe that did not somewhere and for some stretch of time contain observers because the very building materials of the universe are these acts of observer participancy. You wouldn't have the stuff out of which to build the universe otherwise. This participatory principle takes for its foundation the absolutely central point of the quantum: No elementary phenomenon is a phenomenon until it is an observed (or registered) phenomenon. (Wheeler, 1979) We agree with Wheeler to this extent: there seems little, if any, point in speculating about truly unobservable parts of the Universe. If, however, there is a possibility that physical signals or effects from currently unobserved parts of the Universe might one day reach us, then that would in essence make those parts observable, albeit indirectly, and therefore suitable for theoretical analysis and speculation.

Cambridge University Press eBooks•Apr 17, 2014•0 citations

It And Bit

Juan Ramón González Álvarez

It is broadly believed that everything in the universe is found to be made from a few basic building blocks called fundamental particles, governed by four fundamental forces. However, physicists such as John Archibald Wheeler suggested that information is fundamental to the physics of the universe. According to this it from bit doctrine, all things physical are information-theoretic in origin. This doctrine is based in the old Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics; an interpretation which is internally inconsistent and no applicable to the cosmos as a whole. Modern consistent interpretations of quantum mechanics eliminate the old myths about measurement processes and observers' consciousness and reintroduce the idea of a wholly physical reality, invalidating the it from bit doctrine. Utilizing a new phase space formulation of quantum mechanics developed recently by the author, the concepts of bit and it are reconsidered. We introduce the new states D as quantum bits and the new Hamiltonians H as quantum its. The new concepts of it and bit introduced in this work have a well-defined and rigorous definition, unlike Wheeler's concepts. Moreover, the new concepts apply on situations where the traditional wavefunction theory does not work. The it H is not derivable from the bit D and, as a consequence, the old it from bit doctrine gets substituted by the new it and bit. After showing why the physical entropy used in the science of thermodynamics is not a measure of the ignorance of human observers, the final part of this Essay is devoted to emphasize the importance that the bit acquires in modern science when confronted to the delicious multiplicity of the far-from-equilibrium regimes, where the certainty of Newtonian and Schrodinger motion begin to fade in favour of a complex non-geometrical, 'living', conception of Nature: an it and bit conception.

•Jun 1, 2013•0 citations
Abstract This paper will deal specifically with the concept of extending some of the contentions and theories of John Archibald Wheeler into a more complete description of reality, supported in part by physical experiments. The subjects that will be dealt with are well known from quantum theory, and now lately - Nick Bostrom's simulation theory, but will be seen through a new reinterpretation that connects seamlessly, prior positions of Wheeler into a self-consistent model that defines the nature of the physical universe through the convergence of information universe models and the Everett/Wheeler hypothesis. Hints will be given, as to how the reported desires of so-called Silicon Valley billionaires to leave the simulated universe, can be fulfilled using on-the-horizon technology to accomplish time travel through the manipulation of the information based fabric underpinning reality. In whole, the following will be major points discussed: 1. J.A. Wheeler posited that even the greatest mathematical equation in the universe is missing something, the principle by which can become real. He also said, no phenomenon is a phenomenon until is an observed phenomenon. 2. Wheeler developed his theory of it from bit, explaining that the physical world was based upon information at a fundamental level 3. Seth Lloyd, taking that thought further, said that the universe acts like a giant computer processing the information contained therein. 4. Nick Bostrom posited that, in fact, our universe is a computer simulation created by our post-human descendants in the distant future. 5. Philip K. Dick science fiction writer and visionary, in his 1977 public statements mentioned, that due to to events in the past being reprogrammed, things in the present could be changed so that an alternate universe splits off. 6. The universe is participatory, not just with humans, but everything else. Just as various events cause a variety of phenomena, in the extreme cases, the universe responds in the extreme by producing alternate universes. This process resolves many of the issues related to quantum phenomena, parallel universes and time travel 7. The detection of a simulated universe and escape therefrom is similar but not the same as doing so with an information universe. Escape from a simulated universe is impossible just as its detection may be. However, in this paper, a series of experiments will be presented that for the first time ever, establish such a possible detection as well as the method of ultimate escape from our information based universe.
The main mystery of quantum mechanics is contained in Wheeler's delayed choice experiment, which shows that the past is determined by our choice of what quantum property to observe. This gives the observer a participatory role in deciding the past history of the universe. Wheeler extended this participatory role to the emergence of the physical laws ("law without law"). Since what we know about the universe comes in yes/no answers to our interrogations, this led him to the idea of "it from bit" (which includes the participatory role of the observer as a key component). The yes/no answers to our observations ("bit") should always be compatible with the existence of at least a possible reality - a global solution ("it") of the Schrodinger equation. I argue that there is in fact an interplay between "it" and "bit". The requirement of global consistency leads to apparently acausal and nonlocal behavior, explaining the weirdness of quantum phenomena. As an interpretation of Wheeler's "it from bit" and "law without law", I discuss the possibility that the universe is mathematical, and that there is a "mother of all possible worlds" - named the "Axiom Zero".
This essay highlights the scientific vision of John Archibald Wheeler, a giant of 20th century physics. His ideas provided the important insight that humanity may be in the very center of disclosure and manifestation of the evolution of our universe. This on the basis of scientific reasoning derived from quantum physics rather than simple anthropocentrism or scale chauvinism. Wheeler, the Joseph Henry Professor of Physics Emeritus at Princeton University, became 96. Over a long, productive scientific life, he was known for his drive to address big, overarching questions in physics, subjects which he liked to say merged with philosophical questions about the origin of matter, information and the universe. His interests ranged far and wide and were characterized by true fearlessness. Wheeler's work was not only in gravity and nuclear physics. In the 1950s Wheeler grew increasingly intrigued by the philosophical implications of quantum physics. According to Wheeler, there was no universe until the rise of consciousness to perceive it. In fact, Wheeler was one of the first prominent physicists seriously to propose that reality might not be a wholly physical phenomenon. In some sense, Wheeler suggested, reality grows out of the act of observation, and thus consciousness itself: it is participatory. He also stated that information is the most fundamental building block of reality, and that the universe should be seen as a self-synthesized information system: a self-excited circuit that is developing through a (closed loop) cycle. His cosmic variant of the delayed choice experiment led to the idea that human observers may not only determine the present, but also may influence the past. According to Wheeler, ultimate mutability is the central feature of physics, and the meaning of reality can only be established if there is a universal knowledge field, that transcend physical past, present and future.
Introduction First a word of thanks. When I first came across the papers of John Archibald Wheeler on the foundations of quantum mechanics, most of them reprinted in Wheeler and Zurek (1983), I could not believe what I read. Finally here was a colleague of worldwide reputation, given his many contributions to theoretical physics, who was not afraid to discuss openly the conceptual problems of quantum mechanics. The outstanding feature of Professor Wheeler's viewpoint is his realization that the implications of quantum mechanics are so far-reaching that they require a completely novel approach in our view of reality and in the way we see our role in the universe. This distinguishes him from many others who in one way or another tried to save pre-quantum viewpoints, particularly the obviously wrong notion of a reality independent of us. Particularly remarkable is Professor Wheeler's austerity in thinking. He tries to use as few concepts as possible and to build on this the whole of physics. A fascinating case in point is the title of one of his papers “Law without law,” the attempt to arrive at the laws of nature without assuming any law a priori. For me personally his work on fundamental issues in quantum mechanics has been particularly inspiring. The questions he raises are exceptionally far-reaching and some of his concepts in the foundations of physics are so radical that calling them revolutionary would not do them justice.
This article examines the simulation hypothesis (Bostrom N, Philosophical Quarterly 2003, 53(211):243-255), quantum physics evidence for observer-dependent and computational reality, and Advaita Vedanta’s Maya framework as three independent bodies of thought suggesting that ordinary physical reality does not have the independent, objective existence attributed to it. Simulation Hypothesis: Bostrom’s trilemma (extinction before maturity / loss of interest in simulations / we are simulated); statistical argument for simulated consciousness majority; Elon Musk popularisation; David Chalmers’ Reality+ (2022) — simulation as genuine reality. Quantum Physics evidence: (1) Quantisation at Planck scale (Planck length 1.616×10⁻³⁵ m; Planck time 5.39×10⁻⁴⁴ s) suggesting discrete computational substrate; (2) Observer-dependent wavefunction collapse — measurement problem — Copenhagen interpretation: reality constituted by observation; (3) Quantum entanglement and non-locality: Bell’s theorem (Bell 1964); Aspect et al. (1982); Hensen et al. loophole-free test (Nature 2015) — non-local correlations inconsistent with local hidden variables, consistent with shared underlying data structure; (4) Holographic principle: Bekenstein-Hawking entropy area proportionality (→ TQS-2026-211); ’t Hooft (1993); Susskind (1995); Maldacena AdS/CFT (1997): 3D physics as projection of 2D information; (5) Fine-tuning of physical constants — naturalness of parameter-setting in computational framework; (6) Wheeler’s ‘it from bit’ (participatory universe); Tegmark’s Mathematical Universe Hypothesis (2008). Advaita Vedanta: Maya (superimposition/adhyasa of apparent independence on Brahman); Vivartavada (Shankaracharya) — world as apparent transformation; Gaudapada’s Ajata-vada (non-origination: the world never truly began); Mandukya Upanishad four states; rope-snake analogy (rajju-sarpa nyaya); dream analogy (svapna drishthanta); Brahman as consciousness-substrate; Ishvara as cosmic projector; Tat tvam asi (you are That) — Jiva identical to Brahman. Three-way convergence table: computational nature, observer’s constitutive role, non-locality/non-duality, projection from more fundamental reality, consciousness as primary, resolution/liberation/escape. Critical differences: substrate (physical computer vs. consciousness); relation of beings to substrate (separate vs. identical); existence of external creator; radical depth of Ajata-vada vs. simulation theory. Governing thesis: all three frameworks converge on the inadequacy of the commonsense view of physical reality as independent, objective, and self-sustaining. Advaita’s framework is both the oldest and, in its implications for the nature of consciousness and the identity of the individual with the substrate, the most radical.
Introduction Throughout this book we have commented on the need to have a wider vision of physics as more than merely developing and solving equations of motion for states of systems under observation (SUOs). It is our premise that any attempt to discuss time needs to address issues such as the status of observers, apparatus, and suchlike, relative to those states of SUOs. This echoes the following quote from Wheeler: Stronger than the anthropic principle is what I might call the participatory principle. According to it we could not even imagine a universe that did not somewhere and for some stretch of time contain observers because the very building materials of the universe are these acts of observer participancy. You wouldn't have the stuff out of which to build the universe otherwise. This participatory principle takes for its foundation the absolutely central point of the quantum: No elementary phenomenon is a phenomenon until it is an observed (or registered) phenomenon. (Wheeler, 1979) We agree with Wheeler to this extent: there seems little, if any, point in speculating about truly unobservable parts of the Universe. If, however, there is a possibility that physical signals or effects from currently unobserved parts of the Universe might one day reach us, then that would in essence make those parts observable, albeit indirectly, and therefore suitable for theoretical analysis and speculation.
It is broadly believed that everything in the universe is found to be made from a few basic building blocks called fundamental particles, governed by four fundamental forces. However, physicists such as John Archibald Wheeler suggested that information is fundamental to the physics of the universe. According to this it from bit doctrine, all things physical are information-theoretic in origin. This doctrine is based in the old Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics; an interpretation which is internally inconsistent and no applicable to the cosmos as a whole. Modern consistent interpretations of quantum mechanics eliminate the old myths about measurement processes and observers' consciousness and reintroduce the idea of a wholly physical reality, invalidating the it from bit doctrine. Utilizing a new phase space formulation of quantum mechanics developed recently by the author, the concepts of bit and it are reconsidered. We introduce the new states D as quantum bits and the new Hamiltonians H as quantum its. The new concepts of it and bit introduced in this work have a well-defined and rigorous definition, unlike Wheeler's concepts. Moreover, the new concepts apply on situations where the traditional wavefunction theory does not work. The it H is not derivable from the bit D and, as a consequence, the old it from bit doctrine gets substituted by the new it and bit. After showing why the physical entropy used in the science of thermodynamics is not a measure of the ignorance of human observers, the final part of this Essay is devoted to emphasize the importance that the bit acquires in modern science when confronted to the delicious multiplicity of the far-from-equilibrium regimes, where the certainty of Newtonian and Schrodinger motion begin to fade in favour of a complex non-geometrical, 'living', conception of Nature: an it and bit conception.