Does our physical reality exist in an objective manner?

"Although there are always some philosophical assumptions behind this conclusion, it's an assumption that isn't contradicted by anything we've ever measured under any conditions: not with human senses, not with laboratory equipment, not with telescopes or observatories, not under the influence of nature alone nor with specific human intervention. Reality exists, and our scientific description of that reality came about precisely because those measurements, conducted anywhere or at any time, is consistent with that very description of reality itself."

"But there had previously been a set of assumptions that came along with our notion of reality that are no longer universally agreed upon, and chief among them is that reality itself exists in a fashion that's independent of the observer or measurer. In fact, two of the greatest advances of 20th century science - relativity and quantum mechanics - specifically challenge our notion of objective reality, and rather point to a reality that cannot be disentangled from the act of observing it."

"Objective reality Put simply, the big idea is that reality exists, and it exists in a fashion that's independent of anyone or anything that monitors or observes reality. Particles have masses, charges, and other intrinsic properties that don't change, regardless of: who measures it, where they are, how fast they're moving, which property gets measured, or by what means the measurement is acquired."

Observed physical reality exists and measurements across senses, instruments, and locations consistently support a coherent scientific description. Traditional assumption held that reality's properties are observer-independent: particle masses, charges, and intrinsic properties do not vary with who measures them, location, velocity, measured property, or measurement method. Relativity and quantum mechanics challenge that assumption by implying that aspects of reality intertwine with observation and measurement. Objective reality is presented as an assumption rather than an empirically disproven idea, with fundamental constants appearing stable while theoretical developments indicate a more observer-dependent ontology. Measured consistency coexists with philosophical uncertainty about independence.

Read at Big Think