5. Real or imaginary world?|
Does reality exist without observers?
Depending on definition of 'reality':
When the mere pattern of any kind whatsoever, produced howsoever by all existing particles, whatever so called 'particle' means, shall represent the reality, then: definitely YES. But definitely NO, when imagination of things, we observers have by our means of perception, is called reality.
First-mentioned pattern-reality doesn't contain structures like 'round' spheres, 'straight' lines, 'massive' objects, ..., it doesn't distinguish hard and soft or free of mass, doesn't know heat, colours, locomotion, velocity, ..., is neither dark nor bright, neither loud nor silent, ... does not know what is cause, what effect, doesn't recognize any order or rule, not even 'physical variables', ..., but it works, driven and determined by entities, only performing 'revolutions' and 'rotations', in a simple but fantastic intertwining manner.
No phenomenon that we observers find in our reality does exist, when not observed, but the pattern of any kind whatsoever continues to be even if there is no consciousness to observe. As pattern the universe definitely does exist. However it has no properties without an observer, who is able to describe these, respectively who can react on parts of the pattern in a definite way. (The question does not deal with the Copenhagen interpretation in quantum theory, only touches it a little. But a potential for discussion about that topic can be assumed.)
The pattern in our image, our model, corresponds to the array of rotating horn tori, permanently changing size and possibly rotation velocity while rolling along each other and along the common axis with common circumferential speed. That sounds like a naive medieval clockwork-universe, where gear wheels engage with each other, but remember: the model is nothing more than an aid to detect physical-geometric analogies, only to associate the surely unimaginable reality with a mental image, matching into human thought structure.
We handle the three-dimensional space virtuosically and it seems reasonable, to use this virtuosity for the projection of not conceivable mechanisms into a frame we easily understand. But we always have to keep in mind that every description of natural laws is a simplifying model of reality. The universe(s) doesn't (don't) have the restriction of human mental capability.
( more about my philosophical background - written in my very young days - is only available as German text )