When Watching Creates Reality

View Online and Translate

How Observation Shapes What Becomes Real

“Every act of observation sends a signal that guides what the observed becomes.”

 

The Human Question Behind the Experiment

I am not a physicist and never was. Yet the last column left me thinking about the observers who accompany us through life, and about how observation itself, once thought of as passive watching, is in fact an active exchange of signals that shapes what is being observed. This column explores a shift in understanding: that every act of observation, whether in a lab or in life, is not passive measurement but an exchange of signals that reshapes what is being observed.

From childhood onward, we behave differently depending on who the observer is—parents, teachers, friends, spouses, subordinates, or superiors at work. Each forms a structural field of expectation, a kind of signal field, within which our behavior adjusts and choices take shape. To the observer, this may appear as a mere measurement, an act of watching or evaluating. To the one observed, it is received as a signal, a flow of information that carries judgment, meaning, and direction. In every system, observation operates as a feedback process: signals are exchanged, interpreted, and used to adjust behavior toward stability or growth.

When we say, “I am inspired by…,” we mean that we have allowed an observer to enter our inner world and shape the person we wish to become. To be inspired is to internalize a signal from someone or something that represents a higher order of coherence. When we hold in mind the image of a leader or exemplar, whether a living figure such as a president or teacher or a moral voice from the past like Martin Luther King Jr. or Gandhi, we carry their signal within us. Their imagined attention continues to guide our decisions, stabilizing who we are, what we pursue, and what we avoid. These inner observers, persistent echoes of external signals, continuously reshape our direction. The number of such observers we may invite to accompany our life journey is unlimited, each leaving its imprint and altering who we are and who we continue to become.

The Universal Law of Increasing Complexity (ULIC) teaches that all layers of existence are governed by recurring structural logic. Observation, in this sense, is not a mystical gaze but a structured exchange of signals between systems. When we speak of observation, we refer only to situations in which the one being observed can in some way register that it is being observed. For observation to shape outcome, a receptor must exist to receive and interpret the signal. A chair, lacking such receptors, remains unchanged by the act of watching, while an organism, a society, or a particle capable of interaction responds to the signal by adjusting its state. Observation, therefore, is not about looking at things but about the structural relationship that allows signals to be exchanged and meaning to arise.

As I revisited the double-slit experiment, which continues to puzzle physicists, I began to see its deeper implications. In human life, we are never shaped by a single observer; we exist within a network of signals, parents, teachers, cultures, and institutions, each sending distinct expectations that shape a different version of who we become. Could the same apply in physics? If each act of measurement transmits its own signal into a system, could multiple observers generate multiple realities, each consistent with its unique structure of observation? What if the diversity we see in human response is not a departure from nature’s earlier layers but its continuation by other means?

Before I was aware of such evidence, I followed the logic that arises from experience and the ULIC principle, which posits that outcomes emerge from the meeting of energy, structure, and direction. Every act of observation, I reasoned, is a transfer of energy through structure that establishes direction. Later, when I studied the experiments more closely, I discovered that this is precisely what the data confirm. In the quantum realm, measurement is not a passive act of watching; it is an active exchange of information that defines the conditions under which reality crystallizes.

When physicists first explored these phenomena, including Albert Einstein, they revealed much about how the universe behaves, but not why it behaves that way. In 1905, he published three papers describing light acting as both wave and particle, space and time bending to preserve a constant, and random motion giving rise to order. Yet the deeper logic uniting these discoveries remained hidden. One hundred and twenty years later, the ULIC offers to bridge that missing link. It shows that these are not separate mysteries but expressions of a single signal-based structure through which energy, structure, and direction interact to generate coherence. The same principle that governs the motion of light also governs the emergence of life and the organization of societies.

Unlike the physical laws that describe motion, mass, time, and energy, laws essential to our survival, yet silent about people, communities, and prosperity, the ULIC reveals a structural continuity across all layers of existence. The ULIC demonstrates that understanding one layer provides insight into the others. If observation in physics alters outcomes and observation in human life shapes behavior, then observation itself is a universal signaling system: a permanent presence that converts potential into form, the structural observer through which possibility becomes reality. As complexity increases, observation becomes internalized; in human systems, it takes the form of awareness, evaluation, and meaning. Across every layer of existence, what we perceive depends on the signals we receive and interpret, and the signals we receive depend on the structures of observation we have built within ourselves. If this relationship between signal and outcome is truly universal, its clearest expression must appear in physics, where observation can be isolated, measured, and verified.

How Observation Predetermines the Outcome

If human behavior changes under the presence of an observer, physics reveals the same structural logic within matter itself. The double-slit experiment, discussed in the previous column, showed that observation alters the outcome: when photons or electrons were observed, they behaved as particles; when left unobserved, they produced interference patterns, behaving as waves. The same particles, seen through different conditions of observation, produced different realities.

From the perspective of the ULIC, this is not a mystery of consciousness but a question of structure and signals. Every measuring device acts as an observer that sends its own signal into the system, defining a specific field of interaction. When no signal defines the particle’s path, it remains a wave of possibilities. When a signal identifies its position, those possibilities collapse into one realized event. What changes is not the particle itself but the structure of signals that defines how it appears.

Yet even this experiment, elegant as it is, represents only a limited view of what observation can be. In its design, there are two primary signals - presence or absence of measurement - yielding two dominant outcomes: wave or particle. Unlike particles, which respond to a single dominant signal, human systems must navigate overlapping fields of observation, where signals combine, interfere, and reinforce one another. This interaction gives rise to the vast variability of human outcomes and the creativity of social evolution. Families, institutions, markets, and cultures all act as measuring fields, each establishing unique expectations that guide how individuals and societies respond. If a single detector can define the behavior of a photon, what then of a world filled with billions of simultaneous observers, each projecting their own signals of meaning, value, and intent?

The same structural logic extends beyond the laboratory. Later refinements of quantum experiments revealed that the transition between wave and particle behavior is not absolute but continuous. Weak measurements, such as those conducted by Aephraim Steinberg’s group at the University of Toronto (2011), demonstrated that the outcome depends on the strength and quality of the signal exchanged. The more intense the measurement, the more definite the outcome; the gentler the signal, the more possibilities remain. Similarly, the quantum-eraser experiments by Marlan O. Scully and Kai Drühl (1982), later expanded by Yoon-Hak Kim (1999), and the delayed-choice experiments of John Wheeler and Vincent Jacques (2007), all showed that the structure, timing, and type of information exchanged, not merely the fact of observation, determine how reality stabilizes.

These findings reveal that observation is not a switch but a spectrum, not a binary event but a dialogue of signals between system and environment. Changing what is measured, how it is measured, or when it is measured changes the entire configuration of information, and with it, the outcome. Each pattern of observation establishes a distinct relationship between energy, information, and structure, and that relationship defines what becomes real. Observation, therefore, does not record reality; it helps create it.

In ULIC terms, every act of measurement realigns energy through structure toward a particular direction of outcome. The same logic that governs particles governs chemistry, biology, and society. Across every layer of existence, systems evolve by refining how they send, receive, and interpret signals. Observation, whether in a laboratory or in life, is the structural act through which possibility becomes pattern and potential becomes form.

The Human, Chemical, and Biological Parallel

In nature, observation is not confined to conscious awareness. A quantum particle changes its behavior whenever it interacts with any structure capable of recording information, whether a detector in a laboratory or the surrounding environment that scatters light and carries traces of its state. Each interaction is an exchange of signals that converts potential into form and stabilizes it within a broader system. The same structural logic continues through all higher layers of existence. In chemistry, atoms exchange signals through bonds that define their mutual state. In biology, organisms respond to chemical and sensory signals that shape adaptive behavior. In human life, education, culture, and inspiration act as enduring signals that stabilize direction long after the original encounter has passed.

In chemistry, form arises not from the elements themselves but from the relationships between them. A slight change in bonding pattern can transform a harmless compound into a poison or a stable molecule into one that reacts explosively. The atoms remain the same; what changes is the structure of their interaction, the pattern of exchanged signals that determines what they can become. It is connection, not substance, that gives rise to form.

In biology, this structural logic gains vitality. Organisms continuously sense and respond to their surroundings, and even slight variations in timing or signal strength can alter behavior. A pheromone released too soon or too late shifts the rhythm of reproduction or defense. A repeated neural signal forms memory and shapes learning. Each encounter between signal and receptor creates a feedback loop through which organism and environment align. The received signal defines what the system can perceive and how it can evolve, just as measurement in physics defines what can exist.

In humans, observation becomes conscious and layered. Every system of attention, judgment, or belief functions as an internal observer, a network that interprets the signals defining what is valued or forbidden. Authority, education, and culture operate as stabilizing feedback systems that guide collective behavior. A society that treats justice as its guiding signal behaves differently from one driven by fear. A child raised within trust learns expansion; one raised within suspicion learns caution. In each case, observation acts not as detached awareness but as a continuous signal exchange that shapes the path ahead.

Observation, understood as structured communication, is therefore the connective thread that binds atoms, organisms, and civilizations across the continuum of complexity. It is the mechanism by which complexity maintains coherence through feedback and adaptation. As systems evolve, observation becomes increasingly internalized: from the detector in the laboratory, to the receptor in the cell, to the conscience in the mind. What begins as a physical exchange of energy matures into awareness and ultimately into moral responsibility. Observation, whether external or internal, is the structure through which life organizes, learns, and stabilizes what it chooses to preserve.

The Structural Principle of Observation

Observation is the process through which potential becomes form. It is not passive awareness but a structured exchange of signals that transforms possibility into order. Each act of observation defines a unique pattern of interaction, channeling energy through structure toward a specific direction. Within the ULIC, this marks the moment when motion meets organization and purpose begins to emerge. Observation is how systems learn to stabilize themselves and, through feedback, to evolve.

Across all layers of existence, observation performs the same unifying function, yet the forms it takes multiply as systems grow in complexity. In physics, it defines the conditions within which energy condenses into matter. In chemistry and biology, it organizes matter into self-sustaining forms capable of sensing, adapting, and reproducing. In human systems, observation unfolds through awareness, evaluation, and meaning, guiding behavior and collective orientation. Each new layer preserves the logic of those before it while diversifying the kinds of signals that can be exchanged. Evolution does not discard the earlier modes of observation; it reorganizes and integrates them within higher coherence.

Observation determines not only what is seen but how many ways it can be seen. By choosing which signals to amplify and which to mute, systems regulate their internal stability and capacity for transformation. Those that refine observation develop adaptability, learning, and resilience; those that narrow their signal range lose coherence. Within the ULIC framework, the evolution of observation is not a single refinement but the broadening of a spectrum, as systems multiply and integrate the kinds of signals through which energy, structure, and direction align to generate emergent capabilities.

As observation becomes internalized, it evolves into reflection, the ability to register not only external signals but also the ones generated from within. Reflection transforms mere feedback into foresight, allowing systems to anticipate and redesign their own structures of perception. At this level, awareness becomes a creative act: the power to shape the frameworks through which observation occurs. Humanity therefore inherits from the universe not just the ability to perceive, but the responsibility to design perception itself toward coherence.

The silent observer is thus not external to creation but woven into it. Every deliberate act of perception or design strengthens the universe’s capacity for self-organization. Through observation, energy becomes structure, structure becomes life, and life generates understanding. Through awareness, the universe multiplies the kinds of signals it can interpret and continues its evolution toward greater stability, diversity, and complexity.

Designing the Observer

Every system that endures must be able to observe itself, not through a single channel but through a multiplicity of signals that reflect its own internal diversity. Observation is the active process through which systems measure, interpret, and realign their flow of energy, structure, and direction to maintain coherence and enable transformation. In humans, this process becomes conscious. Through awareness, we not only observe but design the observers that determine how we evolve.

Societies design their observers through the institutions they build. Education, governance, law, science, and culture act as structured networks of signals that define what is measured, rewarded, or ignored. The breadth and quality of these observers determine a civilization’s stability and its creative range. A society that relies on a single dominant signal, such as profit, conformity, or control, narrows its field of evolution. One that sustains multiple observers, justice, curiosity, cooperation, truth, creates a richer and more adaptive structure capable of responding to change.

In business, the same structural logic governs collective behavior. When a company declares that it will measure innovation, collaboration, or sustainability, it sends signals that reorganize its people around those expectations. Employees and managers begin to align their choices and language as though the measurement were already occurring. The declaration itself becomes an observer, shaping direction long before data is collected. In this way, even unmeasured metrics exert structural influence: the mere presence of a stated value creates the field within which behavior aligns.

The same principle applies to communities and civilizations. The early Kibbutz movement exemplified it with rare clarity. From their inception (1910), the founders declared explicit values of equality and justice, a mission to work the land and build a fair, self-reliant society, and a vision to help establish a Jewish state in the Promised Land. These declarations acted as enduring signals that continuously shaped behavior and decision-making, maintaining coherence within and beyond their boundaries. For decades, the Kibbutzim prospered not because they pursued wealth directly but because their internal observers: values, mission, and vision, sent a rich spectrum of signals that stabilized collective purpose. When those signals weakened after their goals were achieved, and without updated mission and vision, with the establishment of the State of Israel (1948), coherence declined, and disintegration followed. When the observer loses diversity or clarity, the system it sustains loses direction.

When education measures compliance instead of curiosity, it produces order without understanding. When economies measure quantity instead of value, they expand without prosperity. When politics measures victory rather than trust, it achieves power without stability. Every signal of observation becomes a structural force that defines the field of possibility. What we choose to measure, and how many types of signals we allow, determines the future we can create.

History confirms this principle; communities that designed their observers around shared purpose, equality, or justice sustained extended periods of stability and innovation. Those who narrowed their signals to power or profit lost alignment and coherence. The same structural law applies to every human system: the diversity and integrity of its observers determine the richness of its outcomes.

Self-observation is not passive reflection; it is design. Each person, organization, and nation continually shapes the observers that define its boundaries of possibility. To choose what to measure is to choose what to become. To multiply the types of observers is to expand what can be imagined. As we refine our systems of observation: ethical, institutional, or personal, we define the direction and complexity of our evolution.

The future of civilization will depend not only on the energy we harness or the technologies we invent but on the observers we construct to guide their use. Our fate will be determined by whether these observers strengthen coherence or accelerate fragmentation, build trust or magnify control, nurture wisdom or multiply noise. Observation is the quiet architecture of destiny, the structure through which reality learns not only what to value, but whose signals to heed in defining what it means to thrive.

* I strive to stay true to the facts and the reality they reveal. If you find an error or see a need for clarification, your insights are welcome. 

 SUBSCRIBE here, free of charge!

"Mental and Economic Freedom Are Interconnected."

See you soon,

Nimrod

Dr. Nimrod Israely is the CEO and Founder of Dream Valley and Biofeed companies and the Chairman and Co-founder of the IBMA conference. +972-54-2523425 (WhatsApp), or email nisraely@biofeed.co.il

P.S.

If you missed it, here is a link to last week's blog, “Could Witnessing an Event Change Its Outcome?“.

P.P.S.

Here are ways we can work together to help your agro sector and rural communities step forward and shift from poverty into ongoing prosperity:

* Nova Kibbutz and consultancy on rural communities' models.

* Local & National programs related to agro-produce export models - Dream Valley global vertical value and supply chain business model and concept connects (a) input suppliers with farmers in developing economies and (b) those farmers with consumers in premium markets.

* Crop protection: Biofeed, an eco-friendly zero-spray control technology and protocol.

You can follow me on LinkedIn, YouTube, and Facebook. 

*This article addresses general phenomena. The mention of a country/continent is used for illustration purposes only.