A viable theory in physics is testable. Typically, this means that it provides quantitative predictions that objective measurements can verify. Thus, the natures of objectivity and measurement are philosophical elements of physics. One practical way to think of objectivity was discussed by Saul A. Basri (“A Deductive Theory of Space and Time”, [Amsterda, Holland, 1966]). The essence of this was that an event is objective if the number of competent people who agree that their given subjective experiences arise from the same given external event approaches infinity.

A measurement is a type of objective event. The accuracy of a measured value is the closeness of the value to the true value. Precision refers to the closeness in value of two measurements to one another. If one, a priori, does not know the true value of a measurement, the value is established statistically from a number of measurements. But even if all of the measurements give the same value, each measurement is always limited in significance. Every measurement has limits of significance, or error limits. As my postdoctoral advisor, G. Wilse Robinson, liked to point out, decreasing the error limits of a measurement likely reveals new phenomena.

As discussed in the “Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy” (https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/phenomenology/ ),
“Phenomenology studies structures of conscious experience as experienced from the first-person point of view, along with relevant conditions of experience.” Whatever reveals new phenomena advances phenomenological study. Decreasing the error limits of measurement with precision is a way to expand the phenomenological basis of objective experience.