> It doesn’t actually exclude the “something extra”, it is neutral as to whether or not there is any “something extra” Roger, that's even better. I tried to cl

> It doesn’t actually exclude the “something extra”, it is neutral as to whether or not there is any “something extra” Roger, that's even better. I tried to clarify the log book idea in another reply.[1] The question is whether you can have reality (from the observer's perspective) just based on whether coherent information exists in any setting. Basically the question is whether we can go from "I think, therefore I am" to "something is constructing information." The latter is obviously a simpler, lower-level proof than other concepts of existence. That brings us back to the "something extra." Is it required for our observations to be possible, i.e. can we rule out the log book conjecture? I don't think we can, but I might be wrong. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41783599 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41783599