Hatem Elshatlawy, Dean Rickles, Xerxes D. Arsiwalla (2025), arXiv preprint; later ch. 4 (“Toward a Generalized Theory of Observers”) in Quantum Gravity and Computation, eds. Rickles, Arsiwalla & Elshatlawy (Routledge, 2025-10-29), pp. 52–102 — ARXIV-2504.16225
Key takeaways
- The authors define a “minimal observer” as a bounded system with sensing, internal state transitions, action and feedback closure, and argue that internal/external distinctions, definite measurement outcomes, reference frames, hierarchical levels and coarse-graining are all undefined without such observers.
Seeded from the abstract and a skim, before the reading in NOTE-121. What follows is what the work says about itself.
The paper proposes a formal framework unifying the notion of an observer across physics, computer science and philosophy. Starting from cybernetic feedback models, it gives an operational definition of minimal observers, explores their role in shaping foundational concepts, and identifies what would be left undefined without them. Drawing on quantum gravity, digital physics, second-order cybernetics, and ruliological and pregeometric approaches, it argues observers are indispensable reference points for measurement, reference frames and emergent complexity.
Standing in the record
Filed from the 2026-09-26 sweep of the papers-feed tracker for philosophy: 5 seconds of active reading over 1 session. It was filed Deferred, unread. NOTE-121 is the close reading of 2026-09-26, and it placed the work: Rejected — not worth a reader’s time as a theory of observers. Its one definition is a Moore machine with an unformalised boundary, its “theorems” are definitional, and its quantum claims are asserted, including the claim to identify “the exact moment and mechanism of quantum collapse” (p. 75). A reader wanting minimal observers or agents is better served by the sources it surveys: Ashby, Hartle’s IGUS, Fields, and Gielen & Wise’s observer space in §4.10.3.
When seeded, before the reading in NOTE-121, the entry gave a priority for a deeper reading: low — barely opened (t = 5 s); long and programmatic, and the skim captures the definition and main claims.
What the seeding asked a deeper reading to check (NOTE-121 is that reading):
- Bridges agency (cybernetic sensor–actuator loops) and the observer problem in physics; contrasts sharply with Rovelli’s RQM (LIT-177), where any physical system, electrons included, is an observer.
- Check whether the “theorems” are substantive or definitional, and whether the claim that coarse-graining requires observers survives objective coarse-graining accounts (cf. LIT-150).
- Companion to the same authors’ pregeometry paper (LIT-102).
Access when seeded: arXiv abs page (v1 22 Apr 2025; v3 7 Jan 2026) and the full v3 PDF (50 pp., the Routledge chapter text) read directly; chapter DOI 10.4324/9781003546139-6 and authorship confirmed via Crossref. The tracker listed “Blum, Alexander” as a fourth author — neither arXiv nor Crossref lists him, so he is omitted.