Search FQXi

If you are aware of an interesting new academic paper (that has been published in a peer-reviewed journal or has appeared on the arXiv), a conference talk (at an official professional scientific meeting), an external blog post (by a professional scientist) or a news item (in the mainstream news media), which you think might make an interesting topic for an FQXi blog post, then please contact us at with a link to the original source and a sentence about why you think that the work is worthy of discussion. Please note that we receive many such suggestions and while we endeavour to respond to them, we may not be able to reply to all suggestions.

Please also note that we do not accept unsolicited posts and we cannot review, or open new threads for, unsolicited articles or papers. Requests to review or post such materials will not be answered. If you have your own novel physics theory or model, which you would like to post for further discussion among then FQXi community, then please add them directly to the "Alternative Models of Reality" thread, or to the "Alternative Models of Cosmology" thread. Thank you.

Contests Home

Previous Contests

What Is “Fundamental”
October 28, 2017 to January 22, 2018
Sponsored by the Fetzer Franklin Fund and The Peter & Patricia Gruber Foundation

Wandering Towards a Goal
How can mindless mathematical laws give rise to aims and intention?
December 2, 2016 to March 3, 2017
Contest Partner: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Fund.

Trick or Truth: The Mysterious Connection Between Physics and Mathematics
Contest Partners: Nanotronics Imaging, The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, and The John Templeton Foundation
Media Partner: Scientific American


How Should Humanity Steer the Future?
January 9, 2014 - August 31, 2014
Contest Partners: Jaan Tallinn, The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, The John Templeton Foundation, and Scientific American

It From Bit or Bit From It
March 25 - June 28, 2013
Contest Partners: The Gruber Foundation, J. Templeton Foundation, and Scientific American

Questioning the Foundations
Which of Our Basic Physical Assumptions Are Wrong?
May 24 - August 31, 2012
Contest Partners: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, SubMeta, and Scientific American

Is Reality Digital or Analog?
November 2010 - February 2011
Contest Partners: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation and Scientific American

What's Ultimately Possible in Physics?
May - October 2009
Contest Partners: Astrid and Bruce McWilliams

The Nature of Time
August - December 2008

Forum Home
Terms of Use

Order posts by:
 chronological order
 most recent first

Posts by the author are highlighted in orange; posts by FQXi Members are highlighted in blue.

By using the FQXi Forum, you acknowledge reading and agree to abide by the Terms of Use

 RSS feed | RSS help

Lawrence Crowell: on 4/15/15 at 1:42am UTC, wrote I still intend to read your essay before the contest closes in another...

Armin Nikkhah Shirazi: on 4/14/15 at 16:41pm UTC, wrote Dear Adel, I had read your essay a while back but had difficulty following...

Alexey/Lev Burov: on 4/12/15 at 3:09am UTC, wrote Dear Adel, Do you really think that "Reality is nothing but a...

Joe Fisher: on 4/9/15 at 15:53pm UTC, wrote Dear Adel, I think Newton was wrong about abstract gravity; Einstein was...

Jonathan Khanlian: on 3/25/15 at 16:06pm UTC, wrote Hi Adel, I looked at your essay, but I have to say, I had a hard time...

Vladimir Tamari: on 3/20/15 at 4:16am UTC, wrote Hi thank you for your comment on my page, which was mainly about your own...

Christian Corda: on 3/17/15 at 20:21pm UTC, wrote Dear Adel H. Sadeq, As I promised in my Essay page, I have read your nice...

Mohammed Khalil: on 3/15/15 at 19:53pm UTC, wrote Dear Sadeq, Congratulations on your well-thought of essay. It is a really...


Georgina Woodward: "'Sharp comb" and 'shredder' are used as similes and metaphors because the..." in Schrödinger’s Zombie:...

Sydney Grimm: "Lorraine, Let’s take an example: E= mc[sup]2[/sup]. It is an equation..." in Measuring Free Will: Ian...

Jason Wolfe: "I cannot say that I am enthusiastic about where philosophy has led us. We..." in The Demon in the Machine...

Jason Wolfe: "How can there be any talk of determinism when the real world is built upon..." in Measuring Free Will: Ian...

Georgina Woodward: "I might be able to improve on that description. It's early days.If it is a..." in Schrödinger’s Zombie:...

Robert McEachern: ""do you agree with Davies that these questions will need new physics?" It..." in The Demon in the Machine...

Zeeya Merali: "Joe, You appear to really want to contact Dr Kuhn about his Closer to..." in First Things First: The...

Joe Fisher: "(Zeeya's note: Joe I've deleted the text of this post. It appears to be..." in First Things First: The...

click titles to read articles

First Things First: The Physics of Causality
Why do we remember the past and not the future? Untangling the connections between cause and effect, choice, and entropy.

Can Time Be Saved From Physics?
Philosophers, physicists and neuroscientists discuss how our sense of time’s flow might arise through our interactions with external stimuli—despite suggestions from Einstein's relativity that our perception of the passage of time is an illusion.

A devilish new framework of thermodynamics that focuses on how we observe information could help illuminate our understanding of probability and rewrite quantum theory.

Gravity's Residue
An unusual approach to unifying the laws of physics could solve Hawking's black-hole information paradox—and its predicted gravitational "memory effect" could be picked up by LIGO.

Could Mind Forge the Universe?
Objective reality, and the laws of physics themselves, emerge from our observations, according to a new framework that turns what we think of as fundamental on its head.

September 21, 2019

CATEGORY: Trick or Truth Essay Contest (2015) [back]
TOPIC: “Reality is nothing but a mathematical structure, literally” by Adel H Sadeq [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Author adel sadeq wrote on Mar. 11, 2015 @ 12:48 GMT
Essay Abstract

In This essay I shall derive the laws of nature from a simple mathematical system from a postulate that reality is indeed a mathematical structure. The system can be simulated by a computer program to generate many results that agree with Quantum mechanics. Also I will show that the system can be put in regular more familiar mathematical formalism. The postulate lead to assume particles are made of random lines were one end originates in a small region representing the particle and it extends to all other points in space and some ending on other particles. The points are really nothing but random numbers, hence reality is nothing but some relation between random numbers. Moreover, the lines are responsible for the interaction by a process of crossing or not crossing or meeting.The start point and the end point of these lines define space and the length of the line is interpreted as energy, time is just a change of state. The system unifies space, time, matter, energy and interaction, all in one coherent picture, so particles and the laws of nature governing them appear naturally. The simulations generate some basic Quantum Mechanics results and the 1/r law as in quantum field Theory. There are other results such as the hydrogen 1s level where the universal constants like c, h, e and their relation that lead to Fine Structure constant automatically fall out of the simulation. Two simulations are done; one is Bohr like model and the other Schrodinger like equations solution and show the equivalency. Also, the mass of the electron appear naturally using a simulation which is an extension of the Bohr model which in turn leads to the predicting the size of the proton. The system displays the non-local behavior and explains the EPR in simple terms and shows spin. The coulomb potential is produced by line crossing, Gravity appears when lines meet.

Author Bio

Degrees: B.S. E.E. university of Wyoming 1979 MPHIL E.E. University of Sussex 1987

Download Essay PDF File

Bookmark and Share

Author adel sadeq wrote on Mar. 11, 2015 @ 17:53 GMT

Since the system depends on simulation, I will post some information that was hard to incorporate in the essay.

General notes

1. Javascript program notes

a. The javaScript program is using a random number generator that is not that great and it is also slow

for better system the programs can easily be converted to C++, the express edition is free.

b. Some programs take a long time to get accuracy, so you can run multiple windows or increase kj variable.

You can also decrease kj program so to get a quick feel for the results then increase kj

let it run and come back for it later. The screen might go white, but don't worry it will come back after

it finishes computation.

c. for the Bohr atom the program needs to run for a long time to get a reasonable expectation value,

However, the energy results don't need that much time because it is inherently additive.

I will post some more info a bit later.

Bookmark and Share

Author adel sadeq replied on Mar. 11, 2015 @ 21:11 GMT
More notes

VERY IMPORTANT! At the end of each section starting with Bohr Model a "program link" is written that will take you to the programs. Open them in a new tap or window.

1. javascript programs must compute all points before displaying all results.

2. The hydrogen 1s program has been modified to display the energy correctly without scaling. Caution must be used when changing kj to get the proper graph. Also now, the x axis has the correct scale then

the Bohr radius is 690000-440000= 500000 almost 249601.34 (1/m_e*alpha)

please reduce kj to 2000000000 to get the results in a reasonable amount of time

3. You can get g-factor results in the spin section by reducing kj to get results a bit faster but with less accuracy.

Bookmark and Share

Author adel sadeq replied on Mar. 11, 2015 @ 21:26 GMT
More notes.

1. To see the proton size as was mentioned in the essay go to the electron mass program. In it change the first d0=d1=100 to d0=d1=2.33

and run. you will see a green curve that start with almost 1 which is the mas of the proton(also look in the results window for the first line). You will not see the rest of the graphs because they are very small by comparison You can delete the results to run the program in case you want to modify and run the program again.

2. For the classical electron radius that gives you the mc^2 energy=.2255256(c^2=411.108 from Bohr simulation, m_e=1/1822.8885) change the Bohr program d0=d1=1 and set var mp = 13.3-1, you can lower kj if you like.


Bookmark and Share

Author adel sadeq replied on Mar. 11, 2015 @ 22:19 GMT
One more thing

For the spin program

1. to see the g-factor for the proton set d0=d1=3

change d0=d0+10;

d1=d1+10; to



reduce kj by two zeros, kj=30000000 is ok, because the particles are small.

Bookmark and Share

Ed Unverricht wrote on Mar. 12, 2015 @ 21:12 GMT
Dear Adel Sadeq,

Your idea of simulating points and lines hitting each other is new to me I hope you dont mind a question.

I think I understand the generation of figure.3 and it makes a certain amount of intuitive sense to me given your definitions and simulations. I was confused on how you generate the energies based on the simulation. You seem to be generating hits vs no hits over a period of time, but is there some type of calculation used to generate the energy of the "hit"? Is there somewhere you could point that perhaps I should read more carefully to understand the calculation of potential energy or perhaps expand the idea a bit in a comment.

Regards and best of luck.

Ed Unverricht

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author adel sadeq replied on Mar. 12, 2015 @ 22:14 GMT
Hi Ed,

Thanks for going through my essay. I describe in the essay how the energy is obtained by interpreting the added lengths of the lines that are retained by

the following code

Add all lines : en = en +li

then normalize by the non cross hits f: frf= f/en (sometimes I am lazy en=f/en)

The energy is just like normal physics it is the inverse of distance, the shorter the higher. It is remarkable that my system follows standard system very naturally.

Also the energy can be calculated albeit not directly from the expectation values which represent Kinetic energy and thus show relation to potential energy. So my system is world's first to show exact ontological mechanical relation between PE and KE.

Actually in the one run i.e. going through the kj loops no time is lapsed, but once kj is finished that means an instant has passed, it is like state machine.

explanation is in section 3 Description of two particles interacting

and in the website in

Of course I have seen your work, I will comment later.


Bookmark and Share

Anonymous replied on Mar. 13, 2015 @ 01:15 GMT
Let me elaborate by what I meant by the ontological mechanism between PE and KE. When lines cross we do not register them, meaning the the are removed from the system so that effects the PE obviously . Now as You remove a line another effect takes place is that its start position gets to accumulate less count and hence that will affect the expectation value calculation which is related to KE. That is a clear mechanism that links both KE and PE.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author adel sadeq replied on Mar. 13, 2015 @ 01:45 GMT
That was my post above, FQXI's old glitch.

Bookmark and Share

Jacek Safuta wrote on Mar. 15, 2015 @ 08:49 GMT
Hi Adel,

This is amazing that I could use the title of your essay to name mine. Really in very general view our concepts have a lot in common. You claim “The system unifies space, time, matter, energy and interaction, all in one coherent picture”. That unification is necessary if one wants to remove evident contradictions between quantum physics and general relativity.

We disagree in structures that we use. However, if we assumed, the set of your lines is a kind of geometry? What do you think?

You probably know my essay. I would appreciate your different view and comments. Many people, also participants of the contest, do not have respect to other points of view. But this can be inspiring. What would be the value of such event if all shared the same view?

Thank you.


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Mohammed M. Khalil wrote on Mar. 15, 2015 @ 19:53 GMT
Dear Sadeq,

Congratulations on your well-thought of essay. It is a really nice idea to use points and lines to simulate nature.

Good luck in the contest,


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Christian Corda wrote on Mar. 17, 2015 @ 20:21 GMT
Dear Adel H. Sadeq,

As I promised in my Essay page, I have read your nice Essay. I have two comments:

1) Concerning you Bohr like model, you could be interested that I recently developed a Bohr like model for black holes in a series of recent papers, also together with collaborators. A complete review of this model can be found here.

2) While I am not sure that the main claims of your Essay are correct, I think that your work is interesting and important within the debate of this Essay Contest. More, the reading of your Essay gave me fun. Thus, I am going to give you you a high rate.

I wish you best luck in the Contest.

Cheers, Ch.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Vladimir F. Tamari wrote on Mar. 20, 2015 @ 04:16 GMT
Hi thank you for your comment on my page, which was mainly about your own essay, so I will reproduce most of my answer here:

Thank you Adel Sadeq


I read your interesting essay and find you have gone quite a distance in developing an amazing system whereby you derive basic constants of nature and the Bohr atom from billions two line segments on a straight line! The segments are given random lengths and are at a random distance from each other. Somehow you extract the physics from information about where the lines overlap (not intersect, which implies lines meeting at a point). This is fascinating and I congratulate you.

Unfortunately I have zero experience with C++ or Java script. If I did I would try to see if somehow a similar logic can emerge from my model of spinning nodes in a lattice, rather than in a line segment. In my lattice quantum probability does emerge as I have explained, while the model itself is linear and causal Beautiful Universe Theory . In my model gravity works because the 'hardware' allows chirality, which I cannot see in your line segments. I strongly feel your amazing simulations work not by magic as you joke, but because there is a still deeper physical reality that implements that logic, not merely our computers. I have dealt with this aspect of reality in last year's essay whereby nature acts like a 3D abacus to give the results it does.

May I recommend that you highlight words in your essays that are links. Also on the website display the program themselves not just the panels showing the results. Also put links on these pages back to the homepage. Finally on the website you can find programmers who will volunteer advice about your programs. Good luck!


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Jonathan Khanlian wrote on Mar. 25, 2015 @ 16:06 GMT
Hi Adel,

I looked at your essay, but I have to say, I had a hard time understanding the initial foundations you were laying out in your point and line model. Although I would like to understand it more, I am not familiar enough with Java or C++ to look at the code... nor I am familiar with some of the atomic measurements you have derived. I wish I was able to give you more feedback and thoughts.

Are you familiar with Stephen Wolfram's causal networks? Do you see any relation in your work to his work?


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Joe Fisher wrote on Apr. 9, 2015 @ 15:53 GMT
Dear Adel,

I think Newton was wrong about abstract gravity; Einstein was wrong about abstract space/time, and Hawking was wrong about the explosive capability of NOTHING.

All I ask is that you give my essay WHY THE REAL UNIVERSE IS NOT MATHEMATICAL a fair reading and that you allow me to answer any objections you may leave in my comment box about it.

Joe Fisher

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Alexey/Lev Burov wrote on Apr. 12, 2015 @ 03:09 GMT
Dear Adel,

Do you really think that "Reality is nothing but a mathematical structure"? Do you consider yourself a part of reality? Then you should consider yourself as nothing but a mathematical structure, shouldn't you? If it is so, I would encourage you to to search for a mistake.

All the best,


Bookmark and Share
post approved

Armin Nikkhah Shirazi wrote on Apr. 14, 2015 @ 16:41 GMT
Dear Adel,

I had read your essay a while back but had difficulty following your arguments, so I decided to wait and hopefully let some of the "sink in" before reviewing them again. Unfortunately, I still do not understand how you get QM out of your simulations. Note, I do understand that, since your model is built up from random events iterated many times, you get a probabilistic model, but...

view entire post

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Lawrence B Crowell wrote on Apr. 15, 2015 @ 01:42 GMT
I still intend to read your essay before the contest closes in another week.

Cheers LC

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Please enter your e-mail address:
Note: Joining the FQXi mailing list does not give you a login account or constitute membership in the organization.