Well than, you just answered your own question. Yay!

I didn't even know I asked one.

My bad, or should I say, Mea Culpa, I think my insomnia is finally catching up to my blue cucumber so I have to pay the monkey in chinese yen and get to bed. laters seepy seepy time

u guys are killin me

The scientific concept of one reality is that things dont exist as discrete components isolated from the universe, rather it is a whole, we catergorize and classify for convenience. Our systems and understanding of reality is based on adaptation relevatant to the therory of evolution, which indicates that our percieved reality is probably not relevant to reality as it is. As far as the word reality goes, out of several billion people on the palanet no two realitiies are indentitical, so as humans we live in a inescapable subjective reality confined by our tools which have developed through evolution. The problam lies in, could you make a blind man understand the color blue? Absolutly not, it is an experience completely subjective and to experience it objectively is immposssible, therefore we can never know the true nature of the universe. A good example is the double slit experiment if youre farmiliar. So reality in an absolute defintion would be the state of the universe without subjectivety, meaning without observation, observation being limited to defintion and components which are not nessary for the existance of the universe. It seems like a catch 22. Its an unawnserable question. Start by defining reality, which is also a theroretical immpossibility and subjective.

Basically you stated that no one can definte or interpret reality, so how do you know it exists as an absolute or not?

I think that the definition of reality is the key problem. In the one sense, there is the "pure objective" reality that exists without an observer. And as you said, it is, by definition, impossible to know that reality because it cannot be observed. On the other hand, there is the "subjective" reality that is composed entirely of personal observations, of which there are 6+ billion different ones. This is why I have proposed that the only practical definition for reality is "that which we agree upon". This seems to be supported by a line of questioning: Is there anything "real" which no one agrees upon? If so, does such a thing have any practical use?

Yes of course it is a useful concept in dealing with other defintions that are subjective as there are gradiants of subjectivity. Justice, fairness although completely subjective are neessesary for society and communication, not however useful as to what ultimate or a unified reality is. As for if theres anything "real" the concept is subjective and if an ultimate reality can not be demonstrated than "real" becomes what is useful or likely to be free of contradiction.(short form awnser)