This post was rejected for the following reason(s):
Difficult to evaluate, with potential yellow flags. We are sorry about this, but, unfortunately this content has some yellow-flags that historically have usually indicated kinda crackpot-esque material. It's totally plausible that actually this one is totally fine. Unfortunately, part of the trouble with separating valuable from confused speculative science or philosophy is that the ideas are quite complicated, accurately identifying whether they have flaws is very time intensive, and we don't have time to do that for every new user presenting a speculative theory or framing (which are usually wrong).
Our solution for now is that we're rejecting this post, but you are welcome to submit posts or comments that are about different topics. If it seems like that goes well, we can re-evaluate the original post. But, we want to see that you're not just here to talk about this one thing (or a cluster of similar things).
Hi everyone, this is my first post here. I’m a physicist, independent researcher, and writer, trying to work on unifying quantum theory and gravitation via an informational geometric field. The ideas that I will post in this thread, are part of a broader research program, one that has taken quite some time, and is now currently under consideration at "Foundations of Physics" ( will probably get rejeced xD ). Anyways, I’d love to hear your thoughts, especially any critical takes or overlooked assumptions. I am, by no means, the kind of person to take its work for granted. In fact, im pretty sure there are huge holes that will need fixing. Some, im already aware off, most, probably not! so please, be my guest to join and throw your constructive thoughts!
---
# Part 1: The Problem That Refuses to Die
“Quantum theory describes everything, except the measurement that brings everything into reality.” A common lament among physicists, isnt it?
Modern physics has been spectacularly successful, specially Quantum Physics, yet disturbingly incomplete. Even Heisenberg himself, in an attempt to demonstrate how absurd Quantum Mechanics was, introduced the famous thought experiment of the cat. It was meant to demonstrate the absurdity of the consecuences, and to make a statement: there was something missing.
Quantum theory predicts interference patterns and atomic spectra with incredible accuracy. General relativity predicts gravitational waves and black holes. But when we put the two together, something breaks. We all know that.
And what breaks, in fact, is not just our mathematics. It is our "understanding of reality itself". We don’t know what a measurement truly is. We don’t know whether spacetime is fundamental or emergent. We don’t know what makes a system “classical.” And perhaps most deeply: we don’t know what it means for something to *exist* before it is observed.
Physicists have tried patching this with collapse models, decoherence theory, incomprehensible numbers of dimensions, and many-worlds metaphysics. But none of them answers the central question: "Why does a particle decide to become a “fact”, and what determines where and when?
This is the question I set out to answer, quite some time ago. And the result is what I call the "Unified Informational Field Theory" (UIFT): a model in which spacetime, forces, and quantum measurements, all emerge from a deeper informational structure, grounded in geometry.
In this thread, I’ll walk you through the ideas, from the initial puzzle, through the mathematical structure, to its falsifiable predictions.
Let’s begin with then, shall we? I hope that, at least, you find my ideas interesting!
