Deriving Born rule from Quantum Traction Theory Axiom 1-7

Main Equation

https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

Plain English: every time the system and the detector land on the same tick – same “Reality Dimension (or world-cell) address” , the device records an outcome. Count how often outcome r happens across many such co-locations; that frequency equals the textbook number \langle\Psi|E_r|\Psi\rangle. The “probability” is just the limit of counting real events.

Why this is different from textbooks

  • No probability postulate. Textbooks assume the Born rule. QTT derives it from a tally of co-location events in a Planck-scale ledger.
  • Measurement isn’t magic – It’s defined. “Collapse” becomes a mundane update: we co-located on tick T, so we wrote a record. No spooky action, no global jump—just local bookkeeping.
  • Wavefunction = projection. The lab wave is a visible projection of deeper tick-level dynamics; randomness is epistemic (from mixing/averaging), not fundamental.

Special, testable predictions of the QTT rewrite

These are concrete ways the QTT picture can be probed or distinguished from “Born-as-postulate.”

  1. Gated-detector bias (address window). If your detector only accepts a subset of ticks (a gate window G), the observed frequencies shift in a precise way: \displaystyle p_r(G)=\frac{\langle\Psi|\,G^{1/2}E_r\,G^{1/2}|\Psi\rangle}{\langle\Psi|\,G\,|\Psi\rangle}\,. Prediction: tightening or delaying the gate changes rates via G, not by “altering the state.” Widen the gate and you recover the usual Born weight.
  2. Inter-trial spacing effect. If trials are spaced closer than the apparatus’s reset time \tau_{\rm reset}, residual tick-overlap causes small, quantitative deviations from the asymptotic frequency that vanish like e^{-\Delta\tau/\tau_{\rm reset}}. (Space trials widely and the deviations disappear.)
  3. Universal half-angle factor in symmetric splittings. In fully symmetric two-branch experiments, QTT predicts a geometric amplitude projection factor \displaystyle I_{\rm clk}=\cos\!\big(\tfrac{\pi}{8}\big)=0.9239\ldots that fixes subtle intensity ratios when the instrument is perfectly balanced. (This enters as a relative amplitude factor; flux normalization is preserved.)
  4. Coincidence-timing law. Two-detector coincidence rates depend on the overlap of their tick-gates: \displaystyle p_{r,s}(\Delta)=\frac{\langle\Psi|\,(G_A\!\star_\Delta G_B)^{1/2}\,(E_r\!\otimes F_s)\,(G_A\!\star_\Delta G_B)^{1/2}|\Psi\rangle}{\langle\Psi|\,(G_A\!\star_\Delta G_B)|\Psi\rangle}\,, where \star_\Delta shifts and overlaps the two gates by a delay \Delta. Prediction: move the coincidence window and the joint frequencies follow this overlap law.
  5. Convergence-rate signature. Because outcomes are sums of i.i.d. co-location indicators, frequencies converge as O(1/\sqrt{N}) with an extra, measurable prefactor set by the gate-overlap variance. Tune gates → tune the prefactor; the Born limit itself remains the same.
  6. Context stability. If two measurement contexts use the same effective gate G, QTT predicts the same asymptotic frequencies even if the hardware differs. (It’s the ledger-gate that matters, not the brand of detector.)
  7. Delayed-choice clarity. Delayed or advanced settings don’t retro-cause outcomes; they only change which co-locations are admitted by G. QTT reproduces standard delayed-choice results but predicts the minute rate shifts when timing windows change.
  8. Robust “no-signalling.” Because co-locations are local and counted, marginal frequencies on one wing are invariant under remote gate tweaks (after averaging). QTT matches the quantum “no-signalling” theorem for all practical gates.

Testings:

  • Gate-sweep test: vary the detector’s acceptance window width and delay; verify that p_r(G) follows the overlap law above and saturates to the standard Born weight as G\!\to\!I.
  • Spacing test: decrease the inter-trial interval below \tau_{\rm reset} and watch deviations shrink as e^{-\Delta\tau/\tau_{\rm reset}} when spacing is lengthened.
  • Symmetry test: in a perfectly balanced splitter, look for the predicted \cos(\pi/8) amplitude ratio in carefully normalized branch intensities (with total flux conserved).

FAQ (one screen)

Does this “change quantum mechanics”?
No change to the lab predictions—QuantumTraction explains them. The Born numbers come from counting co-locations in a deeper ledger rather than assuming a probability axiom.

Isn’t this just hidden variables?
No. The “tick” is a local address gate in Reality Dimension, not a global hidden parameter. QTT keeps microcausality and “no-signalling,” and reproduces standard interference.

Where’s the mystery?
Gone. Instead of a magical collapse, we have a precise admission rule (the gate) and a frequency theorem (the box above).

Coming in the next book release

We’ll publish the step-by-step proofs, the gate overlap calculus, and new experimental proposals in the next version of the book.

Get updates — quantumtraction.org/the-book

Shareable snippet

Born rule, no postulate: “Count the co-locations.”
\boxed{\lim_{N\to\infty}\tfrac{1}{N}\sum \mathbf{1}\{\text{co\text{-}loc}_r\}=\langle\Psi|E_r|\Psi\rangle}
One ledger, one law, zero knobs.

Every time a wave (light, sound, electrons… even quantum waves) squeezes through a tight focus, it picks up a tiny, exact twist in its rhythm: a quarter-turn of phase. In the language of physics this is the “Maslov jump,” and in our framework (Quantum Traction) it is not a patch—it’s a built-in Artian geometric rule.

The one-liner

Maslov Jump (QTT):
\boxed{\mathcal A \;\to\; \mathcal A \,\exp\!\big(i\pi\,\tfrac{\Delta\sigma}{4}\big) \;=\; \mathcal A\,e^{\pm i\pi/2}}
\Delta\sigma=\pm 2 \Leftrightarrow \Delta\mu=\pm 1,\qquad \mathcal A_j \propto \dfrac{e^{\,iS_j/\hbar}}{\sqrt{|\det S_j''|}}\,e^{-\,i\mu_j\pi/2}.

What that means in plain English

  • Every focus adds a quarter-turn. When a wave passes a tight focus or “caustic,” its internal rhythm flips by exactly ±90° (that’s the “±π/2”).
  • It’s not a fudge factor. Textbooks usually “insert” this quarter-turn to keep the math smooth. In QTT, it falls out naturally from a simple geometric idea: two orthogonal time-like clocks rotated by a quarter-turn.
  • Same number, many places. The very same quarter-turn shows up in optics (Airy/Pearcey fringes), quantum interference, and even connects to our neutrino results.

Why this matters?

  • No new knobs. There’s nothing to tune; the quarter-turn is fixed by geometry.
  • Already seen in labs. Optics and matter-wave experiments have been measuring this ±90° step for decades. QTT explains why it must be that way. Lost ontological explained.
  • One idea, many payoffs. The same geometry helps unify wave optics, quantum phases, and (in the book) neutrino patterns—without adding extra particles or forces.

What’s next

We’ll publish the step-by-step derivation and new tests in the next release of the book. If you’re curious about how this quarter-turn connects to galaxy dynamics and neutrino mass ratios, that’s where we’ll show the full story.

Details coming in the next edition → quantumtraction.org/the-book

Shareable snippet

Every caustic, a quarter-turn: \boxed{\mathcal A \to \mathcal A\,e^{\pm i\pi/2}}.
Same number across light, sound, electrons—and now, a geometric reason why. QuantumTraction.org #QuantumTraction

Quantum Traction Theory sticks its neck out with two crisp, checkable falsifiers:

The Two Deal-Breakers

Falsifier A — The “lightest” neutrino isn’t light:
If future experiments find

(clearly and robustly), the simplest QTT neutrino pattern fails.

Falsifier B — The splitting ratio is off:
If the measured ratio of mass-squared gaps ever settles away from this number,

QTT’s minimal neutrino sector is falsified.

Why this is a the deal?

Most theories gives a lot of room to maneuver: extra knobs, hidden assumptions, “inconclusive” outcomes. Here, the target is a single clean number—a constant that comes from Artian Geometry and Axiom 1 of Quantum Traction Theory (π and a half-angle), not from fitting data. If nature doesn’t land on it, we pack up this part of the story.

What the symbols mean (30 seconds)

  • m1: the mass of the lightest neutrino state.
  • The boxed number 4\pi^2\cos^2(\pi/8): a prediction from Quantum Traction’s “two-clock” Artian geometry.

Where the evidence stands today

  • Current global fits (all oscillation experiments combined) put the ratio near 33–34.
  • The boxed prediction is 33.697.
  • That’s within current error bars—i.e., the prediction is alive and well right now.
  • As measurements tighten, we’ll either see the number converge (good for QTT) or drift away (game over for this minimal version).

How we’ll know (the experiments to watch)

  • JUNO (reactor neutrinos): ultra-precise \Delta m^2_{21}.
  • DUNE / Hyper-K (accelerator + atmospheric): nails \Delta m^2_{31} and the mass ordering.
  • KATRIN / Project-8 (beta decay) & cosmology: squeeze the absolute masses, pushing on m_1.

Why make falsifiers this sharp?

Because progress loves risk. A theory that can be wrong is a theory that can teach us something—either by passing a hard test or by showing us exactly where to look next.

Quick FAQ

Isn’t 33.697 just numerology?
No. It comes from a specific, one-step geometric projection in the theory (a half-angle from the “two-clock” map). There’s no fit parameter you can slide to make it work.

What if the data end up at 33.0 instead?
Then this minimal neutrino sector of QTT is falsified. Full stop.

Does this say anything about dark matter or cosmology?
For sure, this is the dip of the ice-burg. 😉

Shareable snippet

Two ways to kill it:
m_1\neq 0 or \dfrac{\Delta m^2_{31}}{\Delta m^2_{21}}\neq 4\pi^2\cos^2(\pi/8)=33.697.
No knobs. No excuses. Just data.

Coming next

That little “= ?” you may have seen in our other posts is not decoration. It points to a deeper unification we haven’t revealed yet. We’ll discuss “emergent Standard Model” in the next version of the book.

Learn more about the book: The Book

The Galaxy “Knee” in One Line — And Why It Matters

There’s a tiny acceleration scale that keeps showing up when we look at how stars orbit in galaxies. In our framework (Quantum Traction Theory, QTT), this same number can be written seven different ways—from the Hubble expansion to a Planck-scale tick of time. Here’s the idea in plain English, and a teaser for what’s coming next as seventh part in the upcoming update to the book.

The galactic “knee” (the acceleration where galaxy rotation curves change behavior) can be written as:

The short story: the same galactic number can be read as:

  • a slice of the Hubble expansion (c H/2π);
  • a per-turn pace of cosmic time (c/(2π T));
  • a balance with the mass enclosed by the observable universe;
  • and even a ratio involving Planck-scale quantities (the tiniest meaningful length/time).

That last “= ?” is our cliffhanger—we’ll unpack that mystery in the next version of the book!

Fabrika Theory – Basics

Foundations of Fabrika Physics
chapter 1-1 By: Ali Attar
: Abstract and history of Theory

Back in 1996, when I was in high school, my physics teacher Dr Ghasemi, said a couple of things that intrigued me deeply.

First one, was after he taught us about General Relativity and how precise it is in predictions related to the Gravity and gravitational lensing. However, it kind of breaks, by returning “infinity” when we are discussing black holes curvatures of Space/Time.

The second discussion was about unification of forces. And how gravity left alone and scientists are looking deeply to find a theory of everything to unify 4 forces and they haven’t been successful so far.

In that time, we always had fun, trying to solve the puzzles in our break time. However, these new puzzles, were so interesting for me, that I started to dive deeper into the problems of matching of General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics, almost everyday I have had quite thought experiments for the past 25 years to find solid answers to those puzzles that he seeded in my mind.

Over time, the theory that I developed, shaped better and seemed more and more logical to myself. It showed to me, rather than trying to connect General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics I should search for a fundamental underlaying theory to cover both. I focused my efforts, mainly to describe gravity first. To me, that was the starting point for most of the unanswered questions.

I found not only answers to those questions, but with the same theory, I found very solid and yet intuitive answers to lot of other physic mysteries like “Why and how matter creates curvature in space/time?”, “Does Dark Matter exist?”, “What is Dark Energy?”, “Why Hubble constant changed over time?”.

Back in 2019, one beautiful day in April, I was in Fabrika. A place in Tbilisi that usually young entrepreneurs and intellectuals are gathering, reading books and discussing ideas and sometimes get drunk!

In that day and in that moment in Fabrika, finally, I decided to talk about this deep though experiments after couple of decades! I named it Fabrika Theory in aspiration of that place that I made that decision. The name that I selected, stroke me after a while, when I realized, actually, the first chapter should be re-defining the “Fabrics” of Space/Time!

So I gathered a group of people, for the first time, to hear my theory and give me feedbacks. A physics professor in Georgia-Tbilisi, and 2 other physics enthusiasts. We started recording some YouTubE videos https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCEPrRMy89i6kiVfIGud7cIQ about the theory and then discussed it and challenged my idea mostly off the camera. They questioned the theory as I expected, and I gave the answers one by one. It was a great couple of months journey.

During those meetings, the idea shaped even better. I made some more changes in the theory to make sure, we address the concerns of Professor specially.

In the next couple of years, while I was following my software business, (which has nothing to do with Physics) I worked more with 3 – 4 more physic experts to question the idea further, and shape it even better.

In these discussions, most of the people that I worked (and they had professional physics related teaching jobs, or research) emphasized a lot about not naming them as my advisors in this theory! Found out, that mainstream physics community is not very open to a new physics or a theory that can be an improvements to G.R. Or Q.M.

One of my advisors, told me, you will have a long way, for anyone to consider Fabrika theory as General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics are considered sacred and untouchable in the scientific community. Brutal truth? I hope not. I believe there is a difference between 16th century Church and 21st century’s scientific community.

If you are from this community, you need to have a very open mind, to continue reading this theory.
Fabrika theory, is not going to question any of experimental evidences of General Relativity or Quantum Mechanics. Rather, it tries to create more fundamental definitions that actually, predicts almost similar outcomes, specially in General Relativity, however for a totally different reasonings.


















Foundations of Fabrika Physics
chapter 1-2 Definition of Fabrika Pixels

chapter 1-2 : Definition of Fabrika Pixels and Space-Time-Reality (STR).

Basis of Fabrika Physics starts with a new fundamental definition for Space Time and its nature.

Fabrika theory suggests that Space and Time is NOT a continuum like what is suggested in General Relativity (ref: https://einstein.stanford.edu/content/relativity/q411.html ) and this will result to certain predictions, specially about Dark Matter and Gravity that over the next chapters, we will discuss.

Fabrika Theory also suggest, there is another dimension that I name it ”Reality Dimension” and it has different properties than Space dimensions and Time dimension. (Chapter 1-3). So from now, we will call Space-time as Space-Time-Reality (STR).

The definition of Fabrika Pixels is a little challenging as it has no precedent in modern or classic physics.

First, we start what Fabrika Pixel is NOT:
Single Fabrika pixels are not particles or virtual particles
Single Fabrika pixels are not holding information
Single Fabrika pixels are not type of force or field

And Fabrika Pixels have certain properties and features:
They represent one blank length in all space dimensions.
They “rotate” in certain direction. This is not like normal rotation or spin, it’s a hypothetical term, for property of Single Fabrika Pixels. This rotation creates the “time forward” and also “asymmetry” in certain upcoming predictions of Fabrika theory.
Single Fabrika Pixels (SFPs), are responsible for existence of Space-time-Reality and universe in whole.
They can have handshake with each other and that will be “information” or “matter” or “energy” . These handshakes, they can convert to other type of handshakes. (E.g. conversation of mass to energy and vice versa) . Hand-shaking Fabrika Pixels (HFPs) are creating Barba systems (Chapter 1-5 )
In “single” state they can be destructed. (Redefining Gravity – Chapter 2-1).
When as Single state , they recreate themselves in a constant rate. (Introduction of new constant = SFPs creation rate). This is their (Single Fabrika Pixels) natural property . (Vacuum Energy will be calculated based on this and Dark Energy mystery will be addressed by equation related to this. Also cosmological constant in General relativity will be defined here.) (Expansion of Space-Time-Reality – Chapter 2-2)










Foundations of Fabrika Physics
chapter 1-3: Reality Dimension


(Will add in the next editions)
Foundations of Fabrika Physics
chapter 1-4: Handshaking Fabrika Pixels


(Will add in the next editions)




Foundations of Fabrika Physics
chapter 1-5: Barba Systems

(Will add in the next editions)







Fabrika Gravity
chapter 2-1 Redefining Gravity – Introduction

Introduction: One of the most essential predictions of Fabrika Theory, is about Gravity and how it works. In Fabrika theory, I have defined a very simple and intuitive cause for Gravity which falls in line with the predictions of two famous theories in short distances:

Newton Theory of gravity (Chapter 2-2)
Einstein Theory of General relativity

And falls in line with
prediction of MOND in larger scales.

About gravitational lensing the theory falls in line with the reductions of:
General Relativity
And predicts a theory of the called “Akhasheni Scars” to explain the mysteries of “gravitational lensing” without presence of related mass. (Or gravitational field) in certain cases like bullet clusters.

The formula, has a pretty simple foundation:

Matter continuously destructs Single Fabrika Pixels and that’s the root cause of gravity:
As Single Fabrika Pixels are representing Time/Space/Reality, the effect of Gravity happens
The acceleration and “force” that we feel as gravity is based on the number of Single Fabrika pixels destructed per second. This aligns with the Newton Formula of Gravity. “G” will be recalculated based on the new constant (Constant 2) that will be introduce by Fabrika theory.
The “curvature” in “space-time” happens by continues destruction of Single Fabrika pixels by matter, and therefore, all of the predictions of General Relativity in short distances will be applicable. In longer distances, Fabrika theory will return different results which doesn’t need dark matter to account for gravity.
Fabrika Gravity Principal: The gravity will act different in distances by the following reasons:
1. Plank Size of Gravity Calculation (Destruction of Single Fabrika Pixels) which results to have not possibility of dividing the Gravity effect further (minimum is plank size) in very far distances. It can’t go smaller than a certain value because of Plank size (General Relativity allows that because you can divide the gravity to infinity). To understand better, the exact same thing happens to be the answer in Ultraviolet catastrophe!! Now, we found it in Gravity.
and 2. Nature of Gravity in Fabrika gravity. Nature of Gravity is destruction of SFPs. This means, in a galaxy system for example, the total destructed numbers of SFPs will be equal by the mass of the galaxy! and therefore, the gravity effect will be more in compare to the curvature of space time presented by General Relativity.
So if calculated acceleration by gravity effect, is less than a certain number (I like to refer to MOND Gravity) because distance is MORE than a certain number, Gravity in Fabrika theory will not be splittable anymore, (Plank size minimum effect)







Fabrika Gravity / Quantum Traction
chapter 2-2 Matching with Newton Gravity

Matching Fabrika Gravity with Newton’s Gravity was my very first step of validating the theory of Fabrika.

After all, Newton Gravity had the simplest definition for Gravity for a long time and if I wanted to make sure, that Gravity is working as I am thinking, it suppose to match with Newton Gravity at least in simplest systems. (Apple – Earth!)

The thought experiment was totally successful and destruction of Single Fabrika Pixels by matter could replicate the effects of Gravity predicted as a “force” by Newton.

Basically, how I imagined it was simple. Destruction of Single Fabrika Pixels by matter can be imagined as a Sphere that creates traction and pulling other SFPs from the universe around it in every direction. I called this quantized effect of gravity “Quantum Traction” and I named my youtube channel and website after it. This definitely has nothing to existing definitions of quantum mechanics.

This means, the number of Fabrikas going down toward the massive Sphere from the universe, is proportional to the surface of that sphere and it’s related directly to the mass that sphere has. This idea has the following results:

Each body of mass, will have the gravity effect totally independent from the second body of mass. In Newtonian gravity, you will need two body of mass to calculate the gravity. In Fabrika theory, one body of mass, is enough to calculate the SFPs destructed per second.
The outcome of calculation is pretty match with Newton Gravity.
The speed of replacement of destructed SFPs with provided SFPs from universe is equal to C and that’s how effect of gravity travels with the speed of light in every direction. However, what is defining G is *number* of SFPs destructed per second / maximum that can be destructed per second. To understand this better, consider a sq-meter surface which has the gravity pulling. (for example 1 sq meter of surface of earth). A certain number of Fabrikas are passing toward center of earth. A limited number and the wave that they create is “Gravity”. If we have a number equal by 1meter divided to plank size, power by 2, we are talking about Surface of event horizon of Blackhole.
The acceleration that each objects gets is depend on how many Fabrikas are passing with the speed of light through them. (For example per square centimeter). This creates an outcome acceleration which we know as gravitational “force” in Newtonian gravity. For example in earth we reach to the 9.8/ms2 like Newtonian gravity.
Another example,In the event horizon of Blackhole, all of available SFPs in the surface are moving by the speed of light for replacing the destructed Single Fabrika Pixels in Blackhole.





…….



Akhasheni Scars
Chapter 2 – 3 : Where space/time/reality deformed

Abstract:

Based on part of the Fabrika theory, the continues destructions of Fabrikas, creates deformation of space/time/reality. During the time, this deformation or scar will be deeper and it can cause gravitational lensing without even presenting the related matter.

There is a an analogy for this. Consider a monitor, showing same static picture for a month. Basically, pixels on this monitor, will be burned to the same color that they were showing during that month. Now, if you turn off the monitor, or change the picture, the hallo of original picture is still there!

Or consider, a scar on your face. Even if all of the cells and molecules of your skin change over years, the scar remains there. so deformation of Space / Time and Reality gets deepen.

This prediction happens in Fabrika theory to explains why scientists in the past 70 years, have been very confused by “gravitational lensing”. In Fabrika theory (in contradiction with General Relativity” which predicts only case 1) Gravitational lensing happens for 2 different cases:

Case 1: By presence of matter (speed = c) = Fabrika Gravity = Destruction of SFPs >>> which causes curvature in space time and reality similar to prediction in General Relativity
Case 2 : By having the above effect “long enough” and interact with continues replacement of destructed SFPs by universe around the object and shaping “Akhasheni Scars” deeply in Space/Time/Reality. In this case OBSERVED GRAVITY EFFECT is always MORE than present matter. and this “More” is depend how old or young the evaluated galaxy and galaxy cluster is.

So Fabrika theory predicts, there can be gravitational lensing without presence of the related (or enough matter) if we move that matter after long time of destruction of SFPs. Deformation and scars will be remain there. Matter can move on. (Case 2)
Also Fabrika theory predicts, the Akhasheni scars can create extra “gravity curvature” without presence of related matter! This will create change how Galaxy Clusters move around each other in a very long period of time.







New Gravity equation is the outcome of Farika Theory Gravity

Theory of Quantum Traction (Fabrika theory of gravity) is simplest theory of gravity:

Number of Fabrikas destroyed per second by Each KG of mass.

This formula, will result to 2 different formulas in different levels.

  1. Newton Gravity. As R: F = G(m1m2)/R2 . As Fabrika gravity: Destruction of Fabrika per second per KG will be divided by R2 as we want to calculate the surface of Sphere of effect of Fabrikas destruction (gravity) per second.

Classic Physics, General Relativity and Quantum Physics. 3 Shadows of One Physics : Fabrika

Finding small calculation mismatches in universal theories (like Newton’s Gravity), can be a huge evidence about that theory being a good Shadow Calculator and not the the whole truth. The same story happened about Newton’s Gravity replacing by a better shadow calculator called General Relativity.

Still General Relativity has those small mismatches here and there with Quantum Physics. This is the great sign that both of these theories are Shadow Calculators (for sure better versions).

Trying to match the shadows and explain how these shadows can overlap each other and forgetting about objective reality is the cause of a century old debate!

IF we consider all 3 physics as shadows move on to the next physics that portraits these shadows.

Fabrika physics removes the need of Dark Matter, Dark Energy, Graviton (read: General Relativity and Quantum Physics patches to match with each other!) and explains minimum 10 unsolved mysteries related to Gravity, Quantum physics and universe’s expansions with pretty simple explanation, starting from Fabrika as quantised space/time/reality.

General Relativity and Quantum Physics are different shadows of a more universal Physics. Fabrika.

Picture credit: https://lapollock.wordpress.com/2013/05/12/final-project-self-and-shadow/

Theory of Fabrika : Tbilisi Interpretation

Abstract:

In double slit experiment in Quantum physics, if you shot one particle at the same time, the wave pattern will appear. It seems, the particle passed both slits at the same time and interacted with itself as a wave. (copenhagen interpretation)

We have a new interpretation for this phenomena and we call it “Tbilisi Interpretation. ”

This Interpretation is based on theory of Fabrika and talks about the nature of Quantum Physics and General Relativity with different point of view.

Details:

In theory of Fabrika, we talk about the Barba System. Barba system is similar to subspace concept, with a few important details:

Barba system represents same clock, same space and same reality as the particle itself, however in the eyes of observer it has a different shape and space representation until it collapses back to the same reality as particle. So let’s say, instead of X number of Fabrikas representing and holding the space/time/reality of particle A, X*Y number of Fabrikas will represent and hold the space/time/reality of the Particle A and what we see before collapse of the Barba system (which is different by Field / Wave function in Quantum physics, because Barba system definition is governing *time* based on the clock of that particle, but wave function in Quantum physics is *governed* by time.

Now, let’s interpret double slit, one particle at a time experiment with this interpretation.

Each time, that we are shooting a particle with the same velocity and parameters, it creates same shape Barba System. so in the time of collapse particle will end up based on the shape of that Barba system (and like a wave). But actually, particle moved through observer’s space in its own Barba system and only through one of the slits. however, as we start to collapse more Barba systems, the shadow on the wall, is getting more and more vivid as all of the Barba systems have similar shape and int the time of collapse, they shadow on the wall by letting the particle collapse into the observer’s space/time/reality with similar rate of probability on the wall. So the wave function that we see on the wall, is actually the result of collapsing different waves but with similar shape.