I find this exercise both tedious and counter-productive. I would hope that at least one reader will see why this is tedious.

Special Relativity taken literally

Taking S-R literally to-the-books leads to the following aspects of Reality

- The past, the present, and the future all exist simultaneously. The future is as physically real as the present. This is called the "Block Universe" by writers such as Lee Smolin and Vesselin Petkov.

Quantum Field theory taken literally

Taking QFT literally leads to the following revealed aspects of Reality

- Empty space is not empty. It is a frothing foam of virtual particles that emerge and disintegrate so quickly that they fall under Heisenberg's radar. Consequently the energy in empty space cannot be exactly zero.

- Photons know where they will be in the future.

- Photons know everywhere they could go in space in the future, consistent with physical law. Then they act like they know this. The Feynman Path Integral, weighted by action, will re-construct the Schroedinger Wave. The Schroedinger wave then informs the photon of those probabilities.

- The square root of negative one is physically real. Antimatter exists for one reason: Holomorphic functions have mirror images below the real axis because of complex conjugate vectors. So i = sqrt(-1) is an actual physical object in space, to the same degree that integers 1 and 2 are physically instantiated. On any normal day we would never confuse chalkboard math with the real world in such a roughshod and perverse way, but in this article we adopt Scientific Realism. In this scenario the contents of the equations correspond to physically extended objects. ( -- hopefully the tedium is setting in now.)

Quantum Mechanics taken literally

QM as a literal description of the world yields,

- Whenever an observers measures any physical system in the world, the system will "snap" into an eigenstate. The "snap into a discretized eigenstate" will hereby be dubbed the Collapse of the Wave Function.

- The formalism of quantum mechanics does not contain anything that is a "Collapse of the Wave Function". The Formalism does not define an "observer" either.

- The degree of literalness adopted determines what happens next. If you declare that because the equations do not depict it, Collapse does not occur, then the appearance of "collapse" to "observers" must be explained away. One possibility is that all portions of the entire Wave Function all still exist and persist, and that any eigenstate perceived by any observer will be a combinatorial match-up between that state and the state of the "observer's" body. Put another way, there is a copy of every observer in several other realities, with each separate reality corresponding to each eigenstate.

- Reality is not an objective world out there. Instead it is a collection of many worlds, all physically real, and each differing slightly in their histories.

I would hope that at least some readers will perceive some elbow-room left over for other interpretations. Each of those differing from the above would constitute a retreat (in whatever small degree) from Scientific Realism. Anyone who suggests that some theories of modern physics are mathematical tools for prediction -- sitting there dis-attached from ontological commitments -- would be tacitly expressing Instrumentalism.