[alimov]

Since entropy seems to be a measure of our ignorance, then there maybe there is no point in discussing a perfect observer (of something that is boundless). Edit: > talking about a "perfect observer" that knows all there is to know makes absolutely no sense.

if there was such a thing as a perfect observer, let’s say it is you, then you would still choose to measure some things, but not others. Unless by “perfect observer” you are referring to something that knows the states of all things simultaneously at all times, in which case that (to me) doesn’t sound like an observer at all, would just be someone/something that knows. So like you said “there is always hidden information” but that information is hidden to someone that is doing the observing and so is dependent on them. Otherwise from what or whom would the information be hidden? What would information even be without an observer?