Dear Profs. Minic and Takeuchi,
I loved reading your brilliant and thought-provoking essay!
Needless to say, we share a great deal of your views, and I am glad and most grateful that you cite my work more than once in your essay (your ref. [4]). Indeed, your discussion on the choice of a number field is deep and I also believe that it could be at the core of new ideas on the foundations of physics. In my essay, I develop further the concepts introduced by Gisin (and myself). I appreciated very much your section on potentiality vs actuality, which is something I am also most interested in (my main research project is on the quantum measurement problem!).
I would like to comment that this problem would arise in any irreducible probabilistic theory, besides quantum physics. In my essay I discuss a "classical measurement problem" in the context of our indeterministic alternative classical physics. Moreover, I relate this to causality. I hope you may find an interest in that, and I would appreciate your feedback, should you have time to read my contribution.
At last, I liked your conclusion on emergence and Wheeler's proposition of "law without law". In this respect, you may find interesting the work of Markus P Mueller "Law without law: from observer states to physics via algorithmic information theory" (https://arxiv.org/abs/1712.01826v4), which is conceived in a subjectivist spirit (similar to QBism) and it was acclaimed with a certain favour in the quantum foundations community.
I wish you the best of luck for the contest and I give you the top rating you definitely deserve.
Best wishes,
Flavio Del Santo