Abstract
Increasingly encompassing models have been suggested for our world.
Theories range from generally accepted to increasingly speculative
to apparently bogus. The progression of theories from ego- to geo-
to helio-centric models to universe and multiverse theories and
beyond was accompanied by a dramatic increase in the sizes of the
postulated worlds, with humans being expelled from their center to
ever more remote and random locations. Rather than leading to a true
theory of everything, this trend faces a turning point after which
the predictive power of such theories decreases (actually to zero).
Incorporating the location and other capacities of the observer into
such theories avoids this problem and allows to distinguish
meaningful from predictively meaningless theories. This also leads
to a truly complete theory of everything consisting of a
(conventional objective) theory of everything plus a (novel
subjective) observer process. The observer localization is neither
based on the controversial anthropic principle, nor has it anything
to do with the quantum-mechanical observation process. The suggested
principle is extended to more practical (partial, approximate,
probabilistic, parametric) world models (rather than theories of
everything). Finally, I provide a justification of Ockham's razor,
and criticize the anthropic principle, the doomsday argument, the no
free lunch theorem, and the falsifiability dogma.",