Building upon the first three works of the projective ontology framework, this paper further clarifies the ontological status of the observer: the observer is not an information storage device, but a pure, living decoding rule. Information clusters are static, meaningless syntactic bitstreams; the observer as a rule maps syntactic bits into meaningful semantic experiences. We formalize two modes of rule-information interaction: when information can be defined by the existing rule, the rule remains unchanged; when information is undefinable, the rule undergoes uncaused random expansion, which is precisely the source of the observer's "aliveness" and free will. Since rules can only take information as input and cannot read other rules, no observer can observe another observer—the phenomenon of multiple observers is a projection of narrative coordination within the information cluster. We also derive the conservation relation between rule complexity and apparent physical entropy, extending the information entropy conservation equation to the rule-evolution framework. As an application, we provide a rule-decoding explanation for quantum interference and collapse. This framework further consolidates zero-entropy ontology and offers a formal foundation for the semantic nature of consciousness and the limits of solipsism.
Building upon the first three works of the projective ontology framework, this paper further clarifies the ontological status of the observer: the observer is not an information storage device, but a pure, living decoding rule. Information clusters are static, meaningless syntactic bitstreams; the observer as a rule maps syntactic bits into meaningful semantic experiences. We formalize two modes of rule-information interaction: when information can be defined by the existing rule, the rule remains unchanged; when information is undefinable, the rule undergoes uncaused random expansion, which is precisely the source of the observer's "aliveness" and free will. Since rules can only take information as input and cannot read other rules, no observer can observe another observer—the phenomenon of multiple observers is a projection of narrative coordination within the information cluster. We also derive the conservation relation between rule complexity and apparent physical entropy, extending the information entropy conservation equation to the rule-evolution framework. As an application, we provide a rule-decoding explanation for quantum interference and collapse. This framework further consolidates zero-entropy ontology and offers a formal foundation for the semantic nature of consciousness and the limits of solipsism.
On the basis of the “information cluster projective ontology”, this paper further clarifies the ontological status of the observer and its causal connection with information clusters. The universe consists of innumerable static, self-consistent information clusters, whose internal dynamics follow strict deterministic rules and manifest as a four-dimensional fixed physical world. The observer does not belong to the dimensional system of any information cluster, but is a conscious subject external to information clusters, endowed with the capacity for “active random choice”. Through an act of active random binding, the observer selects a specific trajectory within an information cluster for “reading”, thereby generating a first-person flow of time and experience of existence. The observer’s act of choice possesses genuine causal efficacy, yet its causal chain occurs entirely outside the system of information clusters, producing no observable physical interference within the system. This framework is logically consistent and compatible with existing physics, providing a metaphysical foundation for the unification of free will and physical determinism.
This paper presents an ontological model of the universe based on information clusters and observer consciousness. The universe is not an independent physical spacetime structure, but a projective system composed of numerous self-consistent information clusters. Matter, motion, space, and time have no inherent reality; they only emerge as a stable, perceivable, and measurable "reality" when an observer’s consciousness enters an information cluster and interprets it. Different information clusters are independent or partially overlapping, corresponding to different projection angles and rule systems. Physical laws, dimensionality, particles, and interactions are merely internal narrative rules within an information cluster, not objective laws of an external world. This model unifies the understanding of quantum measurement, the holographic principle, the multiverse, and the apparent nature of spacetime, and is logically self-consistent without conflicting with known experimental phenomena.
Addressing the fundamental metaphysical question of the origin of Being, this paper takes de Broglie’s classical wave mechanics (1924) as its scientific foundation and constructs a self‑consistent interpretive framework of information ontology. It establishes three core axioms: information as the primordial ground, relations prior to entities, and global conservation of information. On this basis, the paper further derives the origin of spatiotemporal dimensions from the laws of information interaction: each basic flip configuration of information corresponds to the generation of a spatial dimension; after three‑dimensional topological closure is completed, the inevitably produced “pending redundant information” that cannot be synchronously and self‑consistently integrated gives rise to the dimension of time within its queuing sequence. Spacetime is therefore not an a priori container but the first compensatory stratum of structure through which information moves toward self‑consistent expression. Subsequently, by means of de Broglie’s phase field, the paper deduces the entire evolutionary chain from pure information distinctions and primordial phase oscillation to the emergence of material hierarchies and quantum‑observation interactions. It argues that quantum measurement and wave‑function collapse are essentially topological remappings and information‑coupling consolidations of heterogeneous phase fields; gravitation and cosmic expansion can be reduced to macroscopic effects of phase gradients. Throughout the text, physical references are strictly limited to de Broglie’s classical wave mechanics, without introducing non‑standard physical models. This study supplements fundamental physical philosophy with a relational‑ontology approach and provides a unified information‑theoretic metaphysical interpretation for foundational problems such as wave–particle duality, the origin of spacetime, and the nature of gravity.
Quantum mechanics is among the most successful mathematical frameworks in modern science, providing precise predictions, experimental validation, and wide-ranging technological applications. This success, however, has been accompanied by a long-standing suspension of a fundamental question: the ontological status of quantum itself. While dominant approaches emphasize how quantum phenomena behave, the question of what these behaviors are the behavior of has largely been deferred. This work does not propose a new physical theory, nor does it challenge the empirical or mathematical foundations of quantum mechanics. Instead, it offers an ontological positioning that reintroduces the question of ground. Quantum is approached neither as a discrete object nor as a purely mathematical formalism, but as the joint mode of operation of energy, nature, and consciousness. Within this framework, consciousness is not treated as an external causal agent acting upon physical systems, but as an immanent, organizing, and meaning-generating aspect of energetic continuity. Differentiation is thus located not in nature itself, but at the level of meaning. Observation and measurement are reinterpreted accordingly, not as mechanisms of physical collapse, but as processes through which ontological distinctions become articulated. By reframing quantum as a ground rather than a thing, this study aims to clarify persistent conceptual tensions—such as the observer problem and the status of measurement—without invoking speculative physics or metaphysical dualism. The paper presents not a solution, but a repositioning: an invitation to reconsider the ontological assumptions that guide contemporary readings of quantum mechanics.
Zero Subjectivity Physics presents a foundations-level framework that removes subjectivity from the base ontology of physical theory while preserving the full operational role of observation. Modern physics successfully predicts what systems do, yet foundational discussions often reintroduce subjectivity—explicitly or implicitly—through observer primacy, awareness, or experiential assumptions. This paper argues that such moves are unnecessary and stem from an inherited anthropomorphic interpretation of observation rather than from physical necessity. In this framework, observation is treated as an operational regime: a physically instantiated pattern of constrained dynamics and information flow that can arise wherever certain stability, memory, self-reference, and latency conditions are satisfied. Observation is not owned by a subject, localized at a privileged vantage point, or endowed with intrinsic awareness. Like light, it is defined entirely by what it does, not by what it is. Duality and non-duality are reframed as observer-dependent descriptive modes applied to the same underlying physical processes, rather than as competing ontologies. Subjectivity, if it arises at all, is treated as a higher-level organizational feature of certain systems, not as a primitive ingredient of physical law. The framework is compatible with classical mechanics, relativity, quantum theory, decoherence-based measurement theory, and operational or relational approaches, while taking a stronger stance against any foundational role for subjectivity. By enforcing zero subjectivity at the base level, the paper clarifies the physics–philosophy boundary, dissolves persistent observer paradoxes, and constrains consciousness-first interpretations without denying the reality of observers as physical systems.
While the inclusion of information theoretical concepts into (quantum)\nphysics has shown enormous success in recent years, the ontology of information\nremains puzzling. Therefore, this thesis aims to contribute to\nthe debate about the ontological status of information in physics. Most\nof the recent debates have focused on syntactic information measures\nand especially Shannon Information, a concept originally stemming from\nCommunication Theory. This thesis incorporates another syntactic information\nmeasure, the so far largely underrepresented notion of Algorithmic\nInformation or Kolmogorov Complexity, a concept often applied\nin Computer Science. Shannon Information and Kolmogorov Complexity\nare linked through Coding Theory and have similar characteristics.\nThrough the comparison of Shannon Information and Kolmogorov Complexity\na framework is developed which analyses the respective information\nmeasures in relation to uncertainty and semantic information. In addition,\nthis framework investigates whether information can be regarded\na material entity and examines to what extent information is conventional.\nIt turns out that in the classical case Shannon Information and\nKolmogorov Complexity are both abstract and highly conventional entities,\nwhich must not be confused with uncertainty and do not bear any\nrelations with semantic information. Virtually the same results are obtained\nin the quantum case, save for the high degree of conventionality;\nit is argued that Quantum Theory constrains the conventional choices of\nthose who wish to use either theory.