Very short explanation in English



My assumption is that world is not physical, but algorithmic.

Imagine you have a stack of coins. If the top coin is heads, you move right. If it’s tails, you move up. After movement you put the coin to the bottom of the stack and check the next one for the next move. The stack is huge and you can not know the order of coins. But you can measure the direction of movement and calculate probabilities of moving right and up from that. That’s analogy of what happens in quantum mechanics – according to the assumption/postulate that this site is built on. But there are “dice” in stack instead of coins. Each elementary particle is such stack of dice and each die tells all stack to move in one of 6 possible directions of discrete 3d space. Each die is used as particle movement direction in cycle. This is how particle moves through universe when there is no interaction. The more dice there are in stack the more directions particle can move in and the lower is impact of one die on particle movement direction. That impact of one die on the direction of a particle movement is called particle “wave length” in physics. The direction you move in and the way you interact with other stacks depends on order of your dice, which nobody can know and that can lead to different possible outcomes in specific situations. That leads to situation when result of particles interaction becomes pseudorandom. Predefined, but not predictable.

The amount of dice in particle is a measure of it’s relativistic mass / full energy.

Total energy of particle E is energy of all it’s dice. E=ℏw, where ℏ – reduced Plank’s constant, w – is not the angular frequency, but the amount of dice in particle.

Interaction between particles happens through exchange of dice. One die produces “Reduced Planck’s Constant” amount of action during one discrete moment of time. Particles always move the same discrete distance during one discrete moment of time. So they all have equal momentary speed. Even though particle always moves with the same speed, it can move at the same position in space – if number of dice with opposite directions are equal. So particle moves the same distance left and right, up and down, forward and back. We say that this particle has rest mass (as it does not move anywhere – “rests”).

As interaction happens only through dice exchange, each interaction updates particle and that’s what is called “Observer effect” in quantum mechanics. Each separate die updates the total power of particle exactly by ℏ. This updates position or momentum of particle. And that’s what quantum mechanics describes as Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle. The more you measure the particle the more you update it and change it’s state.

Bell’s inequalities prove only that you can not measure the same particle twice. By measuring you change the particle, so entanglement with any other particle is destroyed. As a result you can not get statistics for Bell’s inequalities.

The speed of particle is higher then what we know as speed of light – at least sqrt(3) times higher. But speed of photon consists of directions of all it’s die so due to interaction rules we get speed C as max, but might be able to get higher speeds sometimes in specific directions of space.

All dice in the particle (all “relativistic mass”) can be divided into “rest mass”- internal movement and “movement mass” – movement in some direction – the measure of impulse. The more often particle moves in some direction the less often it moves internally. If particle always moves in some direction, it has no rest mass and it’s a photon.

Time is absolute, but watches tick only when internal movement happens. So the more often you move in some direction, the less often you move internally and the less often you tick. Watches ticking frequency linearly slows down as speed increases (actually that would depend on how you speed up the particle).

The described die is actually a quantum of mass / quantum of energy. Primitive discrete machine, the base building block of universe.

In other words what I say is that each elementary particle has much common with a moving Turing machine with finite cyclic tape.

Physics with all its fields, laws, principles etc is statistics of particles movement and interaction. Classical physics describes expected value of near infinite amount of interactions / movement. Quantum mechanics describes statistics of smaller amount of movement/interaction.

Evolution is a global process that includes evolution of stars, biological evolution, human culture evolution/progress and other. All of that is actually evolution of algorithms of different combinations of described dice. Evolution started when the first “die” appeared in our universe (or created our universe when appeared).

Biological evolution started on our planet when new algorithm appeared: complex matter combinations self copying.

As a result everything and everybody in our universe follows their algorithms. Everybody including you and me. We have different levels of algorithms, but the highest level – one that leads us through our lives and gives us desires, hope, happiness – is our instinct. Instinct to change the world. Our happiness – is just “thank you” for following the algorithm. Eureka moments, Einstein’s happiest thought, “god blessing”, insights – all of that are “thank you” that our organism tells us for executing algorithmic pattern given/”chosen” for us by evolution – for changing our world.

As you see, the “explanation” is not that short, but even this is only part of what is described in the articles. This could explain the world, explain complex numbers, connection between exponent function and circular motion, Schrödinger’s cat, show real reasons of biological evolution, explain free will, consciousness and much more.

I don’t have the full theory at the moment. I have algorithm of particles movement and don’t have algorithms off interaction (dice exchange). But the full theory would be “the theory of everything”, the rules (not laws) of our universe – of our huge buggy discrete robot. Maybe such theory would be too much for one person ;). So maybe you would be the one who finishes it.

PS: Einstein once said that “god does not play dice”. Well, in this theory, god was a die himself.

Connection with special relativity

Special relativity has property called “spacetime interval” that is calculated like this:


From that we can get:

(s)²+(x)²+(y)²+(z)² = (Ct)²


I claim that this formula tells us that:

Total speed of particle is always C. Either particle moves in some direction or it moves internally.

If we put this postulate as a basis for relativity, we get theory that has absolute frame of reference, absolute time and Lorentz Aether Theory.

And spacetime interval in this case is actually internal path that would take a particle that moves from event 1 to event 2 with constant speed.

And there is a way to test this assumption (see below).


Predictions are that our universe has absolute frame of reference, in which time ticks with max rate. The faster you move comparing to that absolute frame of reference, the slower your time ticks. Speed of light does not depend on speed of source. Light emitted in the moving frame of reference have speed C in that frame of reference and time ticks slower there, so the light emitted by moving object should have different speeds in absolute frame of reference depending on emission direction. That light will look like a sequence of spheres with center in expected source location. The faster the source moves the smaller those spheres are.

At specific speed of source (v = C/2) sequence of spheres starts looking as a light cone. We call such light source relativistic. Relativistic source with speed > C/2 will emit directional light that will never get to some of observers. And if the light does not get to those observers at all – it’s obviously means light does not get to those observer with speed of light either. So speed of light in their direction is surely not C.

In the picture below I illustrate the prediction of light cone angle for synchrotron radiation. This prediction can be checked in experiment if you have synchrotron. (I don’t have). Maybe some day somebody will check and we would know which way nature works.

My prediction is that the angle AOB should be equal to arcsin((C-v)/v), where v – speed of the source (electrons).

Video below shows how wave front should look depending on speed of source:

And the interesting thing is that we do see that effect in synchrotron radiation / Cherenkov radiation / and in one sided astronomical jets.
Synchrotron radiation looks like a beam for high energy electrons and as a torus (emitted in all directions) for low energy electrons – cyclotron radiation. Just like in the video.

There are other predictions. They are listed in the articles on this site. There are also lot of physical effects “explained” (interpretation given) in the articles.

Here is also an extract from Richard Feynman lecture speculating on similar idea in this video starting at 6:30:

<<I must say, I’ve often made a hypothesis that physics ultimately will not require a mathematical statement. That the machinery will ultimately will be revealed. It always bothers me that in spite of all this local business, what goes on in, no matter how tiny a region of space and no matter how tiny a region of time, according to the laws and how we understand them today, takes a computing machine an infinite number of logical operations to figure out.
Now how can all that be going on in that tiny space? Why should it take an infinite amount of logic to figure out what one stinky tiny bit of space-time is going to do? And so, I made a hypothesis often that the laws are going to turn out to be, in the end, simple like the checkerboard and that all the complexity is from size

So I claim that I might partially have the machinery he spoke about.