Note to Researchers

Observers appear central in every major physics theory — quantum mechanics cannot describe measurement without one, general relativity is built on reference frames, thermodynamics defines entropy relative to what can be distinguished — yet no theory gives the observer a formal, first-class treatment. Observer-Centrism attempts to close that gap: it defines the minimal structure of a persistent observer, encodes it as three axioms, and derives the known laws of physics as consequences of any universe capable of containing such observers. It is ambitious, evolving, and committed to radical transparency about what works and what doesn't.

Observers without consciousness

If your instinct is that “observer-centric” means “consciousness-centric,” this section is for you. The framework defines observers as purely structural entities — a state space, a conserved quantity, a self/non-self boundary. A proton is an observer. An electron is an observer. Measurement is the generation of relational invariants: the structural residue of interactions, not an act of awareness. No concept of consciousness, intelligence, or subjective experience enters at any point in the derivation chain. The hard problem of consciousness is a real and fascinating question, but it is a separate question — and nothing in this framework depends on answering it. What the framework does depend on is taking the structural role of observers in physics seriously, defining that role with mathematical precision, and tracing what follows.

What you'll find here

This site presents a chain of 73 derivations tracing from three axioms — coherence conservation, observer definition, and loop closure — through the fundamental structures of physics: spacetime geometry, quantum mechanics, the Standard Model gauge groups, particle properties, and cosmological structure.

Each derivation is a formal argument that begins with the axioms (and any explicitly declared additional assumptions) and arrives at a specific physical result. Of these 73 derivations, 26 are assessed as rigorous, 42 as provisional, and 1 as non-viable. The framework also makes 12 testable predictions, several of which are accessible to current or near-future experiments.

Select derivations have been mechanically verified in Lean 4, with 24 theorems checked by a proof assistant across 8 derivation files.

What's honestly open

The framework does not pretend to be complete. Every derivation documents its own weaknesses, and the site catalogs these systematically:

• 5 structural postulates — assumptions beyond the three axioms that specific derivations require. These are explicitly declared, not hidden. 15 postulates originally introduced as assumptions have since been derived as theorems, reducing the framework's independent assumptions. The remaining 5 are active targets for future work.
• 226 open gaps — specific logical steps, missing bounds, or incomplete arguments cataloged across the derivation chain. These range from straightforward tightening exercises to deep open problems in mathematical physics.
• 1 non-viable derivation — the attempt to derive the value of the cosmological constant. The site keeps this derivation with an honest assessment of why it fails, what the root causes are, and what would be needed to make progress. Failed attempts are documented rather than deleted.
• 1 derivation tied to a Clay Millennium Problem — the chiral symmetry breaking derivation depends on the Yang-Mills mass gap, which is one of the seven Millennium Prize Problems. This derivation will likely remain provisional until that problem is solved.

The status system

Every derivation carries a status reflecting the strength of its logical chain:

• ● Rigorous — all steps formally justified, no unresolved gaps in the main argument
• ◐ Provisional — main structure is sound but some steps rely on conjectures or semi-formal arguments
• ○ Draft — argument sketched but significant gaps remain
• · Stub — placeholder with direction but little formal content
• ✗ Non-viable — approach assessed as fundamentally blocked; kept for honesty

This system exists because transparency about the state of each argument matters more than presenting a polished facade. A framework that hides its weaknesses cannot be improved; one that catalogs them invites collaboration.

Where to start

The site offers several entry points depending on your interests:

• Domain Overviews — the framework's contributions organized by research area. Enter from your specialty — quantum foundations, cosmology, particle physics, or holography — and see what the framework derives, what's novel, and what's open, without following the full axiom chain.
• Open Gaps — the most direct path to research opportunities. Each gap identifies a specific problem, the derivation it belongs to, and what would be needed to close it.
• Structural Postulates — the framework's declared assumptions beyond the three axioms. Promoting a postulate to a theorem (by deriving it from earlier results) strengthens the entire downstream derivation chain.
• Theorems — a catalog of all named theorems proved across the derivation chain, organized by domain and linked to their source derivations. Includes Lean 4 verification badges where mechanical proofs exist.
• Derivation Map — an interactive dependency graph showing how derivations connect. Hover to highlight ancestors; click to navigate.
• Predictions — testable consequences of the framework, including holographic noise signatures and dark matter granularity, with experimental status tracking.
• Overview tabs — every derivation page defaults to a non-technical overview explaining what the derivation addresses and how the argument works, before the formal mathematics. Switch to the "Derivation" tab for the full formal content.

The spirit of this project

Observer-Centrism does not claim to be the final theory of physics. It begins from the recognition that observers are central to every major physics theory but lack formal treatment within any of them. The axioms define the minimal structure of a persistent observer, encode the requirements a universe must satisfy to contain such observers, and then trace what follows. The meta-empirical fact that at least one such observer exists — you, reading this — connects the abstract theory to the physical world.

The framework already presents a coherent picture of much of fundamental physics: from quantum mechanics and the Standard Model gauge structure to spacetime geometry and cosmological constraints. But "coherent picture" is not the same as "proven correct." Many areas remain where the arguments are incomplete, the assumptions are not yet justified, or the derivation chain requires serious mathematical work to solidify.

These are not embarrassments to be concealed — they are invitations. The open gaps, active structural postulates, and provisional derivations represent specific, well-defined problems where progress is possible. Some may require new mathematical tools. Some may require rethinking assumptions. Some may reveal that a particular derivation path is non-viable, in which case that finding will be documented just as honestly as any success.

If you find errors, we want to know. If you can close a gap, the framework gets stronger. If you can show that an approach is fundamentally blocked, that too is a contribution. The goal is not to defend a theory but to follow the logic wherever it leads.

Contributions of every kind are welcome — from fixing a sign error in a proof to challenging the axioms themselves. Good-faith critique is valued as highly as new results; a well-argued objection that identifies a genuine weakness does more for the framework than a hundred confirmations. If any of the open problems interest you, or if you see something we’ve gotten wrong, the How to Contribute page explains how to get involved.