How should we handle questions like this (Is the Universe real or complex?)?
The question seems very blatantly to be about the work of a crank. Here is an article on Estakhr's website where he claims a conspiracy by American scientists, here is an article where he tries to explain that his made up constant gives a unified force that explains everything physics wants to know, here is an abstract with horrible linguistic issues that tries to explain that the Higgs boson doesn't do exactly what it does do, and so on. While on it's surface the question itself has nothing at all to do with the work of this crank, the blocks of paragraphs that make up the majority of the body of the question are just giving explanations of Estakhr's ideas.
The same question was asked on Physics.Stackexchange and it was closed under their "We deal with mainstream physics here. Questions about the general correctness of unpublished personal theories are off topic, although specific questions evaluating new theories in the context of established science are usually allowed," criterion. I understand the appeal to mainstream physics being something important for the functionality of that site, but of course I can see a lot of reasons why it wouldn't be that great of a/easily decidable criterion for ours. It creates an insular community, it alienates people who aren't familiar with the subject matter intimately, and it is probably not as well of a defined category in philosophy in the first place (Penrose's Gödelian arguments are rejected by the mainstream but Penrose is obviously part of the mainstream himself).
Still, I feel like it is very blatant that this question is not a genuine question in the sense that it was only asked so that the user could promote Estakhr's work (there are a lot of similar questions on Quora). In my mind, this question should absolutely be closed. It is not asked in good faith, it is about the work of a crank, and it serves only to spread those ideas. But, again, I see the issues of trying to impose some sort of 'mainstream' criterion for questions. How should this be handled? Should we adopt a similar close criterion? In this specific case, would it be better to edit out all of the mention of the crank's work that tries to motivate the question and just leave the question itself? I feel like that is a fairer compromise, since of course I cannot be 100% sure that the person asking the question is asking in bad faith, but I think that it's clearly a reasonable assumption.