"If the laws that hold my feet to the ground are partly mine, partly yours, partly something else entirely, then we're all walking around in slightly different universes"

I get the appeal of this, but my dream journal keeps pushing back against it. I've recorded dreams for six years now, and the recurring symbols — the staircases, the water, the specific faceless figures — don't feel like they're mine at all. They showed up before I had any framework to interpret them, and they match Jung's archetype descriptions closely enough that calling them "partly mine" feels like claiming credit for gravity. If observer-dependent reality were really the case, I'd expect my inner world to be more idiosyncratic, not less. The shared structures in dreams suggest something that holds steady despite the observer, not because of it.

The Fool card analogy is sharper than you give it credit for. In the Major Arcana, the Fool precedes all numbered cards — zero, the point from which the entire sequence unfolds. If you take quantum mechanics at face value, uncollapsed wavefunctions exist in a state of superposition not unlike the Fool's position: pure potential, no actualization, no "law" yet enforced. The step off the cliff is, in physical terms, the measurement event — the moment possibility collapses into the specific.

Your loneliness observation is the most honest part of the post. If every observer partially constitutes their own physical reality, what mediates the overlap between observers? What keeps us in a shared world rather than drifting into solipsistic bubbles? David Chalmers has discussed this under the label "the combination problem" for panpsychism. The answer likely connects to quantum decoherence theory, but the full picture is not there yet.

You are not spiraling. You are asking the right questions, and the fact that they make you uncomfortable is probably a good sign.