Cinematograph of Reality: Information, Memory and Playback

THE CINEMATOGRAPH OF REALITY: INFORMATION, MEMORY AND PLAYBACK IN ODTOE Where all information is stored and how to “view” any reality (Кинематограф реальности: информация, память и воспроизведение в ODTOE) Pankratov Anton Sergeevich Панкратов Антон Сергеевич Independent researcher, Kazan, Russia Независимый исследователь, г. Казань, Россия E-mail: [email protected] ORCID: 0009-0002-4870-2995

УДК 530.145 + 003.5 + 167.7

ABSTRACT Within the framework of the Observer-Dependent Theory of Everything (ODTOE), two interrelated questions are investigated: (1) what is the ontological status of information and where is it “stored”; (2) is it possible to access an arbitrary “frame” of an arbitrary reality. It is shown that the field of potential states H is not a repository of information in the usual sense but represents a structure of possibilities from which the operator Ô actualizes configurations. The world line W = {Ψ∗n }n∈Z exists in H as a single inseparable object; the “past” and “future” are not lost or nonexistent frames but cross-sections of W accessible through the projection of Ô onto the corresponding iteration parameter. Kozyrev’s experiments are interpreted as a direct demonstration of access to three temporal cross-sections of a star’s world line. The concept of the operator window width ∆n is introduced — the number of loop iterations simultaneously accessible to a given operator. An access scale is established: from ∆n = 1 (standard perception of “now”) through ∆n ∼ 102 (memory, foresight) to ∆n → ∞ (full access to the world line). The connection with the holographic principle, black holes, and the question of irreversibility is discussed. Keywords: information, field of potential states, world line, observation operator, temporal cross-section, Kozyrev experiment, operator window width, holographic principle, ODTOE.

АННОТАЦИЯ В рамках наблюдатель-зависимой теории всего (ODTOE) исследованы два взаимосвязанных вопроса: (1) каков онтологический статус информации и где она «хранится»; (2) возможен ли доступ к произвольному «кадру» произвольной реальности. Показано, что поле потенциальных состояний H

не является хранилищем информации в обычном смысле, а представляет собой структуру возможностей, из которой оператор Ô актуализирует конфигурации. Мировая линия W = {Ψ∗n }n∈Z существует в H как единый несепарабельный объект; «прошлое» и «будущее» — не утраченные или несуществующие кадры, а сечения W , доступные через проекцию Ô на соответствующий параметр итерации. Козыревские эксперименты интерпретируются как прямая демонстрация доступа к трём временным сечениям мировой линии звезды. Введено понятие ширины операторного окна ∆n — числа итераций петли, одновременно доступных данному оператору. Установлена шкала доступа: от ∆n = 1 (стандартное восприятие «сейчас») через ∆n ∼ 102 (память, предвидение) до ∆n → ∞ (полный доступ к мировой линии). Обсуждается связь с голографическим принципом, чёрными дырами и вопросом необратимости. Ключевые слова: информация, поле потенциальных состояний, мировая линия, оператор наблюдения, временно́е сечение, козыревский эксперимент, ширина операторного окна, голографический принцип, ODTOE.

I. STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM 1.1. Two Questions Any theory claiming completeness in describing reality must answer two fundamental questions about information: (Q-1) Where is information stored? Standard physics places information in the states of physical systems — particle positions, field values, quantum numbers. But what defines the set of possible states? And is information about past configurations preserved after the system has transitioned to a new state? Wheeler’s idea of “it from bit” [17] sharpened this question by suggesting that information is more fundamental than matter. (Q-2) Can one “view” an arbitrary reality? If the multiverse contains |M | ≤ K configurations [1, formula P1.2], is there a way to access any of them — to “switch the channel” or “fast-forward the film”? N (1−S)

1.2. The Cinematographic Metaphor The film reel metaphor turns out to be structurally precise. The projector (Ô) illuminates a frame (Ψn ∈ H) and projects an image onto the screen (Rn ∈ C). The film contains all frames simultaneously; the projector shows one at a time. The “past” consists of frames that have already passed through the projector; the “future” consists of those that have not yet passed. But the film physically contains both. The question is: can one rewind? Switch to a different film? And what is the film itself made of?

II. TWO SPACES: WHERE EVERYTHING RESIDES 2.1. C — the Screen The configuration space C is a Riemannian manifold of all possible states of reality [1, formula 4.1]. A specific configuration R ∈ C is what the observer perceives as “the world right now.” This is the screen: it displays one frame. The screen does not store previous frames — it shows the current one. Information in C is ephemeral: a configuration Rn exists as long as it is sustained by coherence S (postulate P3: T (C) = T0 /(1 − S)n [1]). At S < 1 the configuration has a finite lifetime and is replaced by the next one.

2.2. H — the Film The field of potential states H is an infinite-dimensional Hilbert space (formalizable as a rigged Hilbert space in the sense of Gelfand [2]), containing all possible configurations as potential (non-actualized) states. By assumption D-Rich [1]: H contains projections onto subspaces of arbitrary type. H is the film, but not an ordinary one: it contains not a single sequence of frames but all possible sequences — all films that could ever have been made.

2.3. Ô — the Projector The observation operator Ô : H → C [1, formula A.1] is the projection mechanism. It selects a specific element Ψ from H and actualizes it as R = Ô(Ψ). The “selection” is determined by the observer’s state O = (B, A, H, d) [1, formula 4.2]: R = Ô(B,A,H,d) (Ψ)

(II.1)

The attention focus archetype A determines which region of H is projected; belief B determines with what probability; history H determines from which region of H the next frame is sought; dimensionality d determines to what depth of recursion the projection is accessible.

III. THE WORLD LINE AS AN OBJECT IN H 3.1. Definition The sequence of strange loop iterations generates the world line: W = {Ψ∗n }n∈Z ,

Ψ∗n+1 = Φ(Ψ∗n ) + δΨn

(III.1)

where Φ = ι ◦ Ô is the self-observation map [1, formula U4.1], δΨn is the spiral gap (transcendence of π, [3]). The index n is not time in the usual sense but the iteration number of the loop. Each world line W exists in H as a single object — not a “set of consecutive frames” but a connected curve in an infinite-dimensional space. The “past” (n < n0 ), “present” (n = n0 ), and “future” (n > n0 ) are cross-sections of one and the same object W at different values of the parameter n.

3.2. Kozyrev’s Proof In the experiments of Kozyrev and Nasonov [4, 5], a telescope with a closed objective detected three positions of a star: the visible position (past, n < n0 ), the calculated true position (present, n = n0 ), and the symmetric future position (n > n0 ). Analogous results were obtained by Lavrentiev et al. [18]. ODTOE interpretation [6, 15]: the operator Ôastron directed at the world line Wstar in H projects the entire curve, not a single point. The three signals are three cross-sections of a single object W . This is direct experimental evidence that W exists in its entirety: information about the star’s “past” and “future” is neither lost nor nonexistent — it is actual in H, although it is usually projected into C as only one “frame.”

3.3. Why We See One Frame Standard perception = one frame (Rn0 ). Why? The answer lies in the structure of the operator Ô. Let us introduce the concept of the operator window width:

∆n(Ô) = number of iterations n, simultaneously projected by the operator

(III.2)

For the standard human observer: ∆nhuman ≈ 1

(III.3)

The operator projects one “frame” — the current configuration. This is not a fundamental limitation but a property of a specific operator, determined by the archetype A and dimensionality d.

IV. INFORMATION: NOT STORAGE, BUT STRUCTURE 4.1. Answer to Question Q-1 Information in ODTOE is not stored — it is the structure of H.

Analogy: the number π is not “stored” anywhere — it is the ratio of the circumference to the diameter. One can write down its approximation (3.14159...) on paper, but the paper is not π. The number π is a structural property of Euclidean geometry [3]. Similarly: a specific configuration Rn is not a “record” of information but a projection of the structure of H onto C. Formally: H is defined by axiom (A) as an infinite-dimensional space generated by the very act of observation. It does not precede observation (which would lead to the regress “and who created H?”) but is constituted simultaneously with the observer — through the fixed point Ψ∗ = Φ(Ψ∗ ) [1, Proposition 4].

4.2. Three Levels of “Information” (Level 1) Potential information — the structure of H as a whole. Contains all possible world lines, all possible observers, all possible configurations. Not actualized; exists as a space of possibilities. (Level 2) Actual information — a specific configuration Rn = Ô(Ψn ), projected into C at a given iteration. This is the “current frame” — what the observer perceives. Lifetime: T (C) = T0 /(1 − S)n [1]. (Level 3) Trajectory information — the world line W = {Ψ∗n }, defined by a specific operator Ô. An intermediate level: this is not the entirety of H but a specific “film” — the history of one reality. It exists in H in its entirety; it is accessible through expansion of ∆n.

4.3. Indestructibility of Information In standard physics, the question of information preservation gives rise to the black hole information paradox [7]. In ODTOE the paradox does not arise: information (= the structure of H) cannot be destroyed, since H is constituted by the very act of observation and exists prior to the division into C-configurations. A black hole in C is a configuration with extreme inertia (I(C) → 1) and maximal coherence (S → 1), which by P3 gives T (C) → ∞. Information that has “fallen” into a black hole is not destroyed: it remains part of the world line W in H, inaccessible to operators Ô with d < dsingularity (ontological protection [1, D-Prot]). Hawking radiation [8] in ODTOE terms: the spiral gap δΨ at the boundary of the black hole generates minimal operator action (= radiation), gradually lowering I(C) and S — the configuration slowly decays, releasing information back into C.

V. HOW TO “VIEW THE FILM”: EXPANDING THE OPERATOR WINDOW 5.1. Formalization of Access Access to the world line W is determined by three parameters of the operator Ô: (a) Window width ∆n — how many iterations are visible simultaneously. (b) Offset n0 — which “frame” is at the center of the window (= “present”). (c) World line address Wα — which of the |M | realities is projected. Standard observer: ∆n = 1, n0 = current iteration, Wα = own reality.

5.2. Mechanisms for Expanding ∆n Memory (∆n ∼ 101 –102 ). Human memory is a partial expansion of the window into the past. The observer has access not only to Rn0 but also to approximate copies R̃n0 −k for k = 1, . . . , ∆nmem . The approximation is a consequence of finite capacity: H (observation history in [1, formula 4.2]) contains compressed projections of past configurations, not exact copies. In ODTOE terms: the component H of the vector O = (B, A, H, d) is a projection of the world line W onto the subspace accessible to the given operator: H = Projdim≤d (W |n<n0 )

(V.1)

Foresight (∆n ∼ 100 –101 into the future). Extrapolation is the projection of W onto n > n0 with limited accuracy. By the reconfiguration dynamics formula [1, formula 4.4]: α dC =− ∇U (C) + η(t) dt I(C) + ε

(V.2)

The stochastic term η(t) with variance D(η) = D0 (1−S) makes long-term prediction impossible at S < 1: noise blurs the trajectory. But at high coherence (S → 1, D → 0) the trajectory becomes deterministic and predictable — the window expands into the future. Kozyrev regime (∆n ≫ 1). The Kozyrev telescope is a technological extension of Ô. The closed objective blocks the photonic channel (C-path), leaving only the Hconnection. The operator “sees” the world line Wstar in its entirety: ∆nKozyrev ≥ 3 (past, present, future)

(V.3)

In the limit: as ∆n → ∞ the operator has access to the entire world line — “viewing the whole film.”

5.3. Switching “Channels”: Access to Another’s World Line By postulate P1 [1]: |M | ≤ K N (1−S) . The set of world lines: |M |

{Wα }α=1

(V.4)

Access to another’s world line requires changing the archetype A and/or coherence S with the target reality. Formally: observer O1 with archetype A1 projects world line Wα1 ; to access Wα2 one needs: A1 → A2 : Ô(B,A2 ,H,d) (Ψ) = R(α2 )

(V.5)

Mechanism: changing the attention focus A reconfigures the operator to a different region of H. In the limiting case — changing A while preserving B, H, d — the observer “switches the channel.” Limitation: switching is limited by the coherence S between the current and target reality. At S12 → 0 the realities are completely separated; at S12 > Sthreshold [1, section P5] they overlap. Access is possible only to realities with nonzero overlap.

VI. THE ACCESS SCALE ∆n

Mechanism

Subject

Status

∼ 101 ∼ 102 ∼ 103

Standard perception Short-term memory Long-term memory Historical reconstruction Kozyrev regime Cosmological observation Full world line

Human Human Human Collective

Everyday experience Neurophysiology Psychology Science, archaeology

Ôtechnol Ôtelescope

Experiment [4, 5, 18] Relic radiation

ÔS→1

Theoretical limit

3+ ∼ 1010 →∞

Cosmological observation (∆n ∼ 1010 ): the Webb telescope sees galaxies in the state n0 − 1010 years — literally a “film rewound backward.” A photon is a frame from the distant past of a world line that has arrived via the C-channel. The Kozyrev regime is the same access to the past, but via the H-channel (without photons).

VII. THE HOLOGRAPHIC PRINCIPLE AND ODTOE 7.1. Standard Formulation The holographic principle (’t Hooft [9], Susskind [10]): all information contained in a volume V can be encoded on its boundary ∂V with a density of no more than 1 bit per

4 Planck areas: Smax =

4lP2

(VII.1)

7.2. Interpretation Through ODTOE C is the “volume.” ∂C is the boundary = the interface between C and H. The holographic principle asserts that all information about the volume is encoded on the boundary. In ODTOE terms: all information about configurations inside C is determined by the structure of the operator Ô at the boundary H → C. The operator Ô is the “hologram”: a two-dimensional (in the sense of “boundary”) object encoding a three-dimensional (in the sense of “bulk”) reality. The Planck limit lP sets the minimal scale at which the operator Ô still resolves distinct projections — below this scale Ô has no projections (d < dmin ), and information is not actualized.

7.3. Maximum Information Capacity of Reality The number of distinguishable configurations in volume V : ( Nconf ≤ exp

4lP2

) (VII.2)

By postulate P1 [1]: |M | ≤ K N (1−S) . Identification: ( K

N (1−S)

∼ exp

4lP2

) (VII.3)

whence: N (1 − S) ∼

4lP2 ln K

(VII.4)

This formula relates the number of observers N , coherence S, and horizon area A. At S → 1: the left-hand side → 0, which is consistent with A → 0 (collapse to a single configuration). At S → 0: maximum diversity, bounded by the area.

VIII. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: HOW TO EXPAND THE WINDOW 8.1. Individual Methods From the formula ∆n = f (A, B, S, d) it follows that expanding the window requires modification of the components of the vector O = (B, A, H, d).

Attention focus A: meditative practices aimed at expanding the “field of attention” (from point-like to panoramic) formally correspond to enlarging the region of H covered by the operator Ô. Neurophysiological correlate: activation of the default mode network (DMN), associated with autobiographical memory and predictive modeling [11]. Coherence S: growth of internal coherence (F → 1, E → 1, σ → 0, Λ → 1 in formula D1.1 [1]) expands ∆n in both directions. Mechanism: as S → 1 the stochastic term D(η) = D0 (1 − S) → 0, the trajectory becomes deterministic, and extrapolation (into the future) and reconstruction (into the past) become more accurate.

8.2. Technological Methods Telescope: expands ∆n into the past via the C-channel (photons). Limit: the age of the Universe (∼ 1.38 × 1010 years). Kozyrev detector: expands ∆n via the H-channel. Fundamental difference: access to the “present” and “future” of the star, inaccessible via the C-channel. CRC [6]: the coherent conductivity resonator raises S in a material. If CRC treatment is applied to the detector, its coherence Sdet increases, which expands ∆ndet and enhances sensitivity to H-signals. Prediction: a CRC-enhanced Kozyrev detector should produce more pronounced signals at all three star positions. Quantum computer: operates with superposition — simultaneous access to multiple configurations. In ODTOE terms: a quantum computer realizes ∆n ≫ 1 across multiple world lines simultaneously. Quantum parallelism = projection of multiple Wα in a single act of observation.

8.3. Collective Methods ∏ By postulate P5 [1]: Pcoll = 1 − (1 − Bik ). A group of n observers with a coordinated focus A expands the operator window: ∆ncoll = g(n, Sgroup ) · ∆nind

(VIII.1)

The specific form of g is not determined from first principles, but a lower bound follows from P5: as n → ∞ and S → 1 the collective operator Ôcoll has access to the maximum volume of H. Historical analogy: the collective memory of civilization (libraries, archives, databases) is a technology for expanding ∆n into the past through aggregation of individual Hi . Collective forecasting (prediction markets, scientific planning) is expansion into the future.

IX. “OTHER FILMS”: REALITIES

ACCESS TO ALTERNATIVE

9.1. The Multiverse as a Library By P1 [1]: at S → 0 the number of configurations |M | → ∞. The set of world lines {Wα } is a library of all possible films. Each observer “watches” one film (Wα ), determined by their archetype A.

9.2. Conditions for “Switching Channels” From (V.5): switching requires A1 → A2 . This is possible under: (a) Quantum branching. At the moment of a quantum measurement the world line branches: Wα → {Wα1 , Wα2 , . . .}. Each branch is a separate “film.” By Everett’s interpretation [12]: all branches are realized; by ODTOE: the archetype A of the observer determines which branch they “enter.” (b) Phase transition. At critical coherence (S = Scrit ) the system can discontinuously jump from one world line to another — an analogue of a phase transition in statistical physics [13]. Subjectively: a “sudden insight,” a “paradigm shift” (in the sense of Kuhn [14]). (c) Dreaming. During sleep the standard constraints on A are relaxed: sensory input is disconnected, and the operator Ôdream can project nonstandard regions of H. Formally: Adream ̸= Awaking , and the accessible world lines differ. This is not an “alternative reality” in the full sense (coherence S is low, configurations are unstable), but partial access to alternative Wα .

9.3. Fundamental Limitations Full access to an arbitrary Wα requires: (a) coherence S1α > Sthreshold with the target reality; (b) dimensionality d ≥ dreq for the target configurations; (c) B > 0 for the target outcome (P (E|0) = 0). The boundaries of the constitutive capacity of the observer are investigated in [16]. At S1α = 0 the realities are completely separated — “switching channels” is impossible. This is not a prohibition “in principle” but a structural condition: access requires at least minimal overlap.

X. IRREVERSIBILITY AND THE ARROW OF TIME 10.1. The Paradox If the world line W exists in H in its entirety, why do we perceive time as directed? Why can one not rewind “backward” as easily as “forward”?

10.2. ODTOE’s Answer The arrow of time is a property of the operator, not the film. The map Φ = ι ◦ Ô generates a directed sequence: Ψ∗n → Ψ∗n+1 . The spiral gap δΨ is unidirectional (the transcendence of π gives δΨ > 0, not δΨ ≶ 0). The direction of the gap defines the arrow of time. “Rewinding backward” = reversing the sign of δΨ. This requires inverting the operator: Ô−1 . But Ô is a projection from H to C, and a projection is irreversible (information is lost when projecting from infinite-dimensional to finite-dimensional): dim H = ∞ ,

dim C < ∞ =⇒ Ô−1 is not uniquely defined

(X.1)

The set of Ψ ∈ H that project to one and the same R ∈ C has nonzero measure. “Rewinding” using C-data is ambiguous — the past is reconstructed approximately (through H), but not exactly. However, via the H-channel reversal is possible: the world line W contains all frames, and access to n < n0 does not require inverting Ô — it only requires expanding ∆n. The Kozyrev detector demonstrates precisely this: access to the star’s past without time reversal.

XI. DISCUSSION AND LIMITATIONS 11.1. Explanatory Power The proposed interpretation provides a unified answer to questions Q-1 and Q-2: information is the structure of H; “viewing the film” is the expansion of the operator window ∆n. Kozyrev’s experiments, memory, foresight, telescopic observation, and quantum parallelism all appear as different regimes of a single mechanism — projection by Ô with different ∆n.

11.2. Limitations (a) The operator window width ∆n is introduced phenomenologically; its connection to the ODTOE formalism is not derived from first principles. (b) The function g(n, S) in (VIII.1) is not specified.

(c) The relation (VII.3)–(VII.4) between the holographic principle and ODTOE is a structural analogy, not a deductive derivation. (d) The interpretation of black holes and Hawking radiation through I(C) and δΨ is qualitative. (e) The identification of neurophysiological verification.

memory

with

the

projection

(V.1)

requires

XII. CONCLUSION Information in ODTOE is not stored “somewhere” — it is the structure of the infinitedimensional field H, generated by the act of self-observation (Ψ∗ = Φ(Ψ∗ )). The world line W = {Ψ∗n } exists in H as a single object containing “all frames” simultaneously. Standard perception of “a single moment” is a consequence of the narrowness of the operator window (∆n = 1), not a fundamental property of reality. “Viewing the film” is the expansion of ∆n through: memory (∆n ∼ 102 into the past), foresight (∆n ∼ 100 –101 into the future at high S), technological enhancement (∆n ≥ 3 in the Kozyrev regime; ∆n ∼ 1010 for cosmological observation). Switching between realities requires changing the archetype A and coherence S1α > Sthreshold . The arrow of time is a property of the operator (δΨ > 0), not the film. Irreversibility is a consequence of the ambiguity of Ô−1 when dim H = ∞ > dim C. But via the H-channel the past is accessible without time reversal, as confirmed by Kozyrev’s experiments.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST The author declares no conflict of interest.

FUNDING This research was conducted without external funding.

REFERENCES 1. Pankratov A.S. Theory of Everything: Observer-Dependent (ODTOE) // Preprint. — 2025. — 47 p. 2. Gelfand I.M., Vilenkin N.Ya. Generalized Functions. Vol. 4: Applications of Harmonic Analysis. Rigged Hilbert Spaces. — Moscow: Fizmatgiz, 1961. — 472 p.

3. Pankratov A.S. The Number π as a Structural Invariant of Self-Consistent Observation in ODTOE // Preprint. — 2025. 4. Kozyrev N.A. Causal or Asymmetric Mechanics in Linear Approximation. — Pulkovo, 1958. — 90 p. 5. Kozyrev N.A., Nasonov V.V. On Certain Properties of Time Discovered Through Astronomical Observations // Problems of Research of the Universe. — 1980. — Issue 9. — P. 76–84. 6. Pankratov A.S. Electricity as Directed Action of the Observation Operator: From Charge to a New Type of Generator // Preprint. — 2025. 7. Hawking S.W. Particle Creation by Black Holes // Commun. Math. Phys. — 1975. — Vol. 43. — P. 199–220. DOI: 10.1007/BF02345020. 8. Hawking S.W. Black Hole Explosions? // Nature. — 1974. — Vol. 248. — P. 30–31. DOI: 10.1038/248030a0. 9. ’t Hooft G. Dimensional Reduction in Quantum Gravity // Conf. Proc. C. — 1993. — Vol. 930308. — P. 284–296. arXiv: gr-qc/9310026. 10. Susskind L. The World as a Hologram // J. Math. Phys. — 1995. — Vol. 36. — P. 6377–6396. DOI: 10.1063/1.531249. 11. Raichle M.E. et al. A Default Mode of Brain Function // Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. — 2001. — Vol. 98. — P. 676–682. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.98.2.676. 12. Everett H. «Relative State» Formulation of Quantum Mechanics // Rev. Mod. Phys. — 1957. — Vol. 29, No. 3. — P. 454–462. DOI: 10.1103/RevModPhys.29.454. 13. Stanley H.E. Introduction to Phase Transitions and Critical Phenomena. — Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press, 1971. — 308 p. 14. Kuhn T.S. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. — Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press, 1962. — 172 p. 15. Pankratov A.S. Kozyrev’s Experiments and the Strange Loop of the World Line // Preprint. — 2025. 16. Pankratov A.S. Boundaries of the Constitutive Capacity of the Observer in ODTOE // Preprint. — 2025. 17. Wheeler J.A. Information, Physics, Quantum: The Search for Links // Complexity, Entropy and the Physics of Information / Ed. W.H. Zurek. — Addison-Wesley, 1990. — P. 3–28. 18. Lavrentiev M.M. et al. On Scanning the Starry Sky with a Kozyrev Detector // Dokl. Akad. Nauk. — 1992. — Vol. 323, No. 4. — P. 649–652.