Nature of Reality: SUBJECTIVE or OBJECTIVE
Nature doesn’t “vary” its truth... It just is. The only thing that changes is our understanding. Relativity doesn’t mean reality bends to perspective (it means measurements do), because space and time ain’t fixed backgrounds like Newton thought... They are dynamic, intertwined, and change based on motion and gravity. But the core laws? They hold. The speed of light? Same for all observers. Energy-momentum? It's also Conserved. Causal structure? It's too Fixed.
Saying, “truth varies” just because two clocks tick different in different frames? That’s like saying rivers change direction because boats sail different speeds depending on current... The river’s flow stays the same, what changes is how it’s experienced.
So, if nature itself was subjective, why do physical laws still hold even when we move at 0.99c or sit in a deep gravitational well? Why ain't they breaking to match our whims?
Even in quantum physics...
If we think nature is subjective to our perception, we are seeing it wrong. Uncertainty, superposition, wavefunction collapse... none of these mean reality itself is uncertain or “varies” with perspective. Quantum mechanics doesn’t make nature subjective... It just shows that nature operates probabilistically at small scales. The underlying structure, the rules governing these probabilities, are fixed. Schrödinger’s equation? Deterministic. Quantum fields? Follow strict symmetries. Energy levels? Quantized, not random.
Now saying that, “truth varies” just because measurement affects the system? That’s like saying an electron in an atom jumps between discrete energy levels only when observed... but no, it follows strict selection rules. Quantum tunneling in the Sun’s core? That is indeed Probability driven, yet stars shine with precise, predictable fusion rates. The hydrogen atom’s spectral lines? Always the same, no matter who measures them.
So, if nature was truly subjective, why do atoms in distant galaxies follow the exact same quantum laws as the ones in our labs? Why ain't they shifting based on who's watching?
Instead of assuming that entirety will completely change one day and everything will be different, one should look at how the current understanding works. Quantum physics, as we know it today, explains every phenomenon within a consistent framework… Has Schrödinger’s equation ever failed? Has Quantum Electrodynamics ever shown a mismatch with experimental data? Has the Standard Model ever predicted cross-sections in particle colliders inaccurately?
One day, a better theory may come, but even then, it will build upon the existing framework... just like Einstein’s relativity extended Newtonian mechanics. There’s no reason to believe that quantum mechanics will be completely discarded… It will evolve, not vanish.
So, nature operates under strict, consistent laws, at least as far as our observations confirm. If you start calling everything subjective just because things might change in the future, then science itself becomes impossible… Should NASA stop launching rockets just because one day we might find out that gravity isn’t a force?
If one says “truth varies” just because methods of measurement is subjective, that’s like saying the ocean’s depth changes depending on whether you measure it with sonar or a rope... The depth is there, measurement just interacts with it.
It’s not that nature holds different truths, but rather that our perception of nature varies. Instead of saying that nature behaves differently, it is more accurate to say that the idea of our perception being privileged has been broken.
Nature is truely an objective entity, since get-go of time to the end of space.
