As this apparently requires some explanation: In this thought experiment of a hypothetical quantum-ontological universe, an (aware) observer would come with their very own sphere of causality, which not necessarily defines the entirety of the universe. While this may explain our apparent loneliness, it would also pose another, even more urgent question: What would happen as we expand our horizon, thus expanding our own sphere of causality into what may be already established realities that are not necessarily compatible with our own? Is everything going to collapse? Or, what forms of life will never be, just because we became aware of these parts of the universe? Is exploration even ethical? On the other hand, I enjoy the thought of a lone water bear floating into outer space and thus defining reality.
Like, I'm sorry, but this has no connection to anything in mainstream physics. There is no indication that causality is connected to observation. You appear to think that "observation" is a process involving awareness, which is just not what the word means, in the context of QM.
This is like a scifi story maybe, but none of what you've said has any rigorous meaning. "sphere of causality" would be a cool band name, though.
Cosmology isn't only physics, it has also (always) been a playground for thought experiments and philosophy. (Compare the rather well established field of science fiction.) But, even if it's just about physics, I'm pretty amazed how cosmology seems to mirror the current state of media, which is a cultural artefact. (E.g, we had theories like the holographic universe, the pixelated universe, etc, not to speak of the clock, quite in accordance with respective trends in media technology. In the end, this isn't really surprising, as it's always about us observing the universe, the ultimate medium.)
