For an observer at the very edge of our observable universe, their observable universe is described by a different set of bits compared to ours. As we are still causally connected, we share some of those bits, but not all. Their Hubble sphere (causally connected part of space limited by the expansion of space at the speed of light 13.8 billion light years from here) is different from ours, yet they overlap partially. This is to some degree true for all observers so if one wanted to be poetic, one could say we share reality with other people, but our realities are not the same.
We may speculate that some of the bits constituting the observers Hubble sphere may be changed by accelerating. Or perhaps one should say what constitutes their Hubble sphere can move or change. A kind of corresponding phenomenon is called the Unruh-effect which causes accelerating observers to observe (thermal) radiation in vacuum where none used to be. There are a number of ways to justify this. One is to look at the Minkowski diagram of an accelerating observer and notice that there exists a (Rindler) horizon that separates a causally disconnected region of space from them and this leads to an effect that is essentially the same as Hawking radiation of a black hole. Another way is to consider what would happen to vacuum fluctuations under acceleration and notice they gain energy. Something similar happens in the dynamical Casimir effect.
Quantum indeterminism may be a result of previously causally disconnected information getting mixed into our reality in certain types of phenomena like acceleration. These types of phenomena are closely related to entanglement and according to ER=EPR conjecture the existence of space is basically a result of entanglement. This would suggest that entanglement is also related to expansion of the universe, the cosmological constant and dark energy. It would be kind of nice to get rid of indeterminism and dark energy all at once.
Finally getting data that might assist with quantum gravity?
One may think one culture is superior to others even if it's shit. It's just less shit compared to the others (one is aware of). At least that's what I mostly think. Generally speaking I'm not a big fan of any culture. I'd like to think it's more important that a society is governed by scientific thinking, analytical problem solving and progressive explorative goals which aim to maximize personal freedom, physical well-being and long term sustainability.
Freedom of Speech: The right to tell people what they don't want to hear. Unfortunately this view doesn't seem particularly popular these days. Short of lying about personally harmful information, I'm pretty much in favor of absolute freedom of speech without exceptions.
I think it is ok for authors (please let's not call them creators, they are not gods) to ask for money for copies of their works (please let's not devalue these works by calling them content) in order to gain income (the term compensation falsely implies it is a matter of making up for some kind of damages).
— Richard Stallman
I wonder if I'd get more done if I were rich... oh well, I guess we'll never know.