Hello,
I’m not a physicist, but an artist driven — by illness and existential urgency — to understand the foundations of the world from first principles. Lacking formal training and facing cognitive limitations, I tried to ground my thinking in what seemed absolutely irreducible:

There is experience.

From this, I constructed what I call a Reflexive Tension Ontology — a framework in which a minimal subjectivity reflexively relates to itself through the tension between being and non-being. This tension differentiates, giving rise to structure, perception, and phenomena. I’m aware this touches on philosophical traditions I may not fully know.

Despite my limitations, I tried to confront this model with physics. The probabilistic nature of quantum mechanics — particularly the Born rule and the collapse postulate — seemed like a good testing ground.

So I did the following:

Formalized my ontological idea into a very simple mechanism for “collapse” based on internal reflexivity.
Tested it against the Born rule using simulations.
Then ran these comparisons on actual QPUs (quantum processors, e.g., via IBM's quantum platform).

The result?

The model’s outputs correlate surprisingly well with Born rule predictions in standard setups.
But in situations where Born has no clear prediction (non-normalized interference patterns, incomplete collapse), the model slightly diverges, while still matching the empirical tendencies of QPU outcomes.
My formalism is clearly imperfect, even rudimentary — but something in the structure may behave meaningfully.

I’m aware to be incompetent and this is far from a finished theory. I lack the training to push it further.
But I wonder: is there something here worth examining? Could a trained physicist or philosopher spot either a fatal flaw, or a hidden insight?

I’ve documented everything (as I could, with code and graphs) in English here:
https://zenodo.org/records/15986302

I would be grateful for any critical feedback, advice, or even refutations.
I’m not trying to prove anything — only to see clearly whether there’s something real, or just a mirage.

Thanks for reading.
Yves

Posts

Wikitag Contributions

Comments