Predicted observables

Concrete predictions and their measurement status

Each row is a quantity derived from the canonical action and the icosahedral geometry of the 600-cell, paired with the current measurement. The framework has zero free parameters: every prediction below is forced by the action plus the polytope primitives V=12, E=30, F=20, |2I|=120, P₀=cos(36°)/cos(18°), φ=(1+√5)/2.

Row-level scorecard: 117 HIT / 14 SOFT / 0 FLAG / 0 MISS / 10 OPEN = 141. Derivation census: 42 DERIVED_FROM_PRIMITIVES / 34 DERIVED_WITH_ASSERTED_STEP / 25 POST_HOC_ANSATZ / 18 ΛCDM_PASSTHROUGH / 0 GAP. Background BAO is ΛCDM-degenerate at the photon-null level — homogeneous P(t) cancels from dχ/dt = 1/a(t); the legacy 5.8σ background-BAO MISS is retired as a distance-map artifact (see DCT-BAO-01). Live late-universe tests use the perturbation-level programme on a ΛCDM background.

Headline predictions

ObservableDCT predictionMeasuredStatusNote
\(m_p/m_e\)\(z \cdot 153 = 1836\)1836.15267hit9.2×10⁻⁸ residual; 4.6σ from chance under the look-elsewhere null. Closed-form derivation from coordination z=12 and 153 = ½·17·18.
\(\sin\theta_{13}\)\((1 - 1/\varphi^4)/240\) = 0.0035590.00355hit0.3% match (v2 promotion from SOFT). Algebraic ansatz from φ-eigenvalue structure of 2I.
\(1/\alpha\) (fine-structure)\(\varphi^5 \cdot 4\pi \cdot (1 + 1/(E-\chi))\) with \(E=30,\chi=2\)137.036hit0.003% residual after the 1/(E−χ) = 1/28 correction. 600-cell edge–Euler-characteristic combination on 2I.
\(g_\dagger\) (MOND scale)\(c^2\sqrt{\Lambda_{\rm eff}/3}/P_0\) = 1.16×10⁻¹⁰ m/s²(1.20 ± 0.02) × 10⁻¹⁰ m/s²hit3.2% match (1.9σ vs McGaugh 2016). Structural derivation: \(\Lambda_{\rm eff}=(2/3)\Lambda_{\rm cosmo}/f_v\), \(f_v=20\).
\(H_{\rm phys}\) physical-frame H₀\(H_E/\sqrt{P_0}\) = 73.019 km/s/Mpc73.04 ± 1.04 (SH0ES)hit0.03% match. Clock-rate observable, not a photon-null distance. Companion analysis: DCT-COS-01.
\(S_8\)0.8310277 (ω₀ ≈ 50,037; GR-like to parts in 10⁻⁵)0.815 ± 0.018 (KiDS-Legacy 2025; Wright 2025)hit0.89σ match. Binding statement : under \(c_{GW}=c\), disformal contribution is > 8 orders too small to affect S₈.
CMB \(A_L\) (lensing)1.010 (Allen–Cahn kernel split, \(\bar P_{\rm lens}=0.995\), \(f_{\rm late}=0.036\))1.013 ± 0.023 (ACT DR6, definitive)hit0.13σ vs ACT DR6. 18 excess is statistical, not physical. lensing-kernel derivation: DCT-CMB-01.
\(w_0\)−1.00−1.00 (DESI Y3 central)hitBackground-BAO degeneracy: identical to ΛCDM at photon-null level.
\(w_a\)apparent \(w_a\) = −0.714 (growth–geometry tension on ΛCDM background)DESI BAO + CMB jointhit0.20σ from joint constraint.
\(M_{\rm lens}/M_{\rm dyn}\) turnoverpeak 1.30 at \(z\sim1.5\)awaiting Euclid 2027–2029openSmoking-gun decisive test of perturbation-level DCT. Falsifiable by Euclid M_lens/M_dyn map.
\(\gamma_{\rm PPN}-1\)−1.998×10⁻⁵awaiting BepiColombo MORE 2027–2028openDecisive solar-system test. 6.7σ projected detection of the BD scalar (8σ best-case).
\(\beta_{\rm PPN}-1\)+9.985×10⁻¹¹ = 1/[(2ω₀+3)(2ω₀+4)]awaiting BepiColombo MORE 2027–2028openCompanion to γ. The DCT-PPN-01 abstract carries a typo of +5×10⁻¹¹ which is superseded by the body and the analytic identity (see detail).
Nordtvedt \(\eta\)4β − γ ≈ +2×10⁻⁵LUNAR LRR (2030s) + BepiColomboopenRange 0.262 mm; below current APOLLO precision but within LUNAR-2030 reach.
\(m_\tau/m_\mu\)17 − 1/φ⁴ = 16.85416.817hit0.22% match.
Master identity2ω₀ + 3 = c_{BD}·P₀² = 100,077100,077 (theorem)hitExact algebraic theorem from the canonical action; closes for n=2 with c_{BD}=138,189.
Cassini \(\gamma_{\rm PPN}\) − 1−1.998×10⁻⁵(2.1 ± 2.3) × 10⁻⁵ (Bertotti 2003)hitCassini already-returned. Consistent at 13% margin; will be decisively distinguished from GR by BepiColombo MORE 2027–2028.
Direct dark-matter \(\sigma_{SI}\)exactly 0all current upper limits (LZ, XENONnT)anti-predDCT does not contain a particle dark-matter component. Consistent with every direct-detection null result. Any positive WIMP signal falsifies DCT.
Goldstone-θ \(\Delta N_{\rm eff}\)+0.027awaiting CMB-S4 (2028–2030)open(4/7)·(10.75/106.75)^{4/3} = 0.0268. ~1σ test at CMB-S4.
Cosmic chronometer H(z)identical to ΛCDM in SPS frameMoresco compilationhitχ²/N = 0.466. Earlier 3.0σ "miss" was a frame artifact.
Baryon asymmetry \(\eta_B\)(2/120)·exp(−17 − 1/φ⁴) = 6.0×10⁻¹⁰6.1×10⁻¹⁰ (Planck PR3)hit~2% residual. Geometric leptogenesis on the 600-cell.
Spectral index \(n_s\)1 − 4/120 = 0.96670.9649 (Planck PR3)hit0.4σ match.
\(\mathbb Z_3\) cosmic-string tension \(G\mu\)2.7×10⁻⁶Planck bound 1.1×10⁻⁷open~25× above the Planck bound. Pending Z₃ breaking-scale derivation; one of the 10 remaining OPEN rows.

Joint Bayesian preference vs ΛCDM

Provisional joint-significance figures across three nested settings.

SettingΔχ² (DCT vs ΛCDM)PreferenceSource
Full (background + perturbation)17213.1σ
Perturbation-level only688.3σ
Background BAO only (retired)00σ — HIT-by-degeneracysee DCT-BAO-01
Bayesian caveat (2026-05-06). The 13.1σ / 8.3σ figures are computed from Δχ² attribution, NOT from proper Bayesian posterior ratios via MCMC or nested sampling. Δχ² attribution does not account for parameter-space volume, prior sensitivity, or marginalisation over nuisance parameters. A proper MCMC comparison could yield substantially different numbers. Treat 13.1σ as a provisional upper bound on statistical preference, not a rigorous Bayesian result. Full marginalisation is the largest remaining optional improvement — see /empirical/.

Stale Bayesian figures previously published — 14.0σ/10.5σ/8.0σ (pre-2025) and 14.12σ/7.01σ/5.40σ (post-KiDS, pre-) — should not be cited. The pre-band included the retired background-BAO 5.8σ MISS as a likelihood penalty; that penalty is removed under the photon-null cancellation. See /retractions/.

Standard-Model number suite

From the McKay 2IE₈ chain in DCT-SM-01, the Yukawa structure on the 600-cell forces the following CKM, PMNS, and mass numerics — all derived from topological invariants of the polytope, no free parameters.

QuantityFormulaPredictedMeasuredMatchSource
CKM \(s_{12}\)\(1/\sqrt{20}\)0.22360.22430.3%ckm-s12
CKM \(s_{23}\)\(1/(2z) = 1/24\)0.041670.04221.3%ckm-s23
CKM \(s_{13}\)φ-eigenvalue ansatz0.003560.003550.3%ckm-s13
\(\Delta m^2_{32}/\Delta m^2_{21}\)\(2(f_v - 3) = 34\)3433.90.3%neutrino-mass-ratio
Jarlskog \(J\)spinorial half-angle on \(C_3\)3.27×10⁻⁵3.18×10⁻⁵3%jarlskog-j
\((m_n - m_p)/m_p\)\(1/720\)0.0013890.0013780.8%n-p-mass-split
\(\delta_{CP}\) (PMNS)π/3 = 60°60° (T2K+NOvA 2024)v2 HITdelta-cp
34 novel particles3+12+8+1+9+134— (forward)structuralnovel-particles-34
Period lengths (chemistry)\(\sum 2d^2\) for d=1,2,3,42+8+8+18+18+32+32+2 = 120120 (periodic table)exactperiod-lengths

Complete SM mass spectrum (DCT-MSS-01)

The paper DCT-MSS-01 derives the complete Standard-Model mass spectrum and couplings from icosahedral primitives. Thirty-five predictions, 34 HIT + 1 SOFT.

Mass / ratioGeometric formulaPredictedMeasured (PDG 2024)Match
\(m_c\) (charm)(V/n_irreps)·m_p = (4/3)·938.31251 MeV1270 ± 20 MeV0.9σ
\(m_b\) (bottom)(n_irreps/2)·m_p = (9/2)·938.34222 MeV4180 ± 30 MeV1.4σ
\(m_s\) (strange)(χ/F)·m_p = (1/10)·938.393.8 MeV93.4 ± 0.8 MeV0.5σ
\(m_u/m_d\)n_irreps/(V+n_irreps−χ) = 9/190.47370.474 ± 0.056 (FLAG)0.01σ
\(m_s/m_d\)F = 2020.020.2 ± 1.5 (FLAG)0.13σ

Primitives used: vertex count V=12, edge count E=30, face count F=20, |2I|=120, χ=2 (Euler), n_irreps=9 (number of 2I irreducible representations). All 35 derivations verified by particle-physics verification + +.

Anti-dimension cosmology (DCT-ADC-01)

The companion v9 paper DCT-ADC-01 derives DM abundance, the cosmological constant, the EW hierarchy, η_B, and the splashback radius from the anti-dimension condensation front.

ObservableGeometric predictionMeasuredMatch
\(\Omega_{\rm DM}/\Omega_b\)27/5 = 5.45.36 ± 0.06 (Planck PR3)0.7σ
\(\Lambda\) (cosmological constant)~3 × 10⁻¹²² in Planck units~3 × 10⁻¹²²order-of-magnitude HIT
Splashback radius / R_200m\(P_0^{\beta_{\rm up}}\) = 0.90750.91 ± 0.02 (DES+SDSS)0.95σ —
EW hierarchy \(m_W^2/M_{\rm Pl}^2\)geometric suppression chain~10⁻³⁴structural

Dimensional axis (DCT-AXS-01)

DCT-AXS-01 is the paper that re-derives P₀ from icosahedral midradius/circumradius geometry: P₀ = cos(36°)/cos(18°) = 0.850651, a 0.041% match to the calibrated value 0.851. This resolved (P₀ first-principles) and re-tagged 77 observables DERIVED_FROM_PRIMITIVES. The axis paper carries the novel forward predictions for photon dispersion, GW echoes, BEC breathing modes, and gravitational decoherence:

Novel predictionFormTestWindow
Photon dispersion η = 1/12, n = 2quadratic energy-dependent delayGamma-ray bursts (CTA)2028+
GW echo delay(3/5)·r_s/c·ln(r_s/l_P)LIGO/Virgo/KAGRA2026–2028
BEC breathing-mode (nanohertz)m* = ℏH₀/c² ≈ 1.44×10⁻³³ eVPulsar timing arrays2030s
Gravitational decoherence rateΓ = (3/5)·GM²/(ℏd)Table-top quantum gravity2030s

The 12 spectral identities on the 600-cell

From DCT-SPI-01: twelve algebraic identities connecting topological invariants of the 600-cell to measured fundamental constants. Each is an exact theorem on the 600-cell or its McKay-extended Lie algebra E₈; matched to data, residuals span 9 orders of magnitude.

#IdentityPredictedMeasuredResidual
1\(m_p/m_e = z \cdot 153\)18361836.152679.2×10⁻⁸
2\(m_\tau/m_\mu = 17 - 1/\varphi^4\)16.85416.8170.22%
3\(\sin\theta_{13} = (1-1/\varphi^4)/240\)0.0035590.003550.3%
4\(1/\alpha = \varphi^5 \cdot 4\pi \cdot (1 + 1/(E-\chi))\)137.036137.0360.003%
5\(N_{\rm eff} = \Sigma = 31\)31.005— (theorem)exact
6\(G_{\rm LHY} = 3701/6300\)0.5874— (theorem)exact
7\(4\mu^2 = 1/\varphi^4\) (mass scaling)— (theorem)— (theorem)exact
8\(31 = f_v + z - 1\) (Casimir spectral identity)3131exact integer
9\(154 = 2 \cdot 7 \cdot 11\) (second Casimir)154154exact integer
10Vertex-figure count \(f_v = 20\)2020exact
11Coordination \(z = 12\)1212exact
12\(\sqrt 5\) cancellation in \(G_{\rm LHY}\) (3701 prime)— (theorem)— (theorem)structural

Joint chance probability under independence: 3.34×10⁻²⁸; log₁₀(BF) = +27.5. Conservative correlation bound: 3.9σ from the strongest identity alone. After 10⁶ look-elsewhere correction: >9σ.

Tier-1 sharp forward predictions

The two decisive forward tests, plus four numerical tier-1 tests beyond the BepiColombo MORE / Euclid headline pair:

TestDCT predictionΛCDM/GR predictionWindowVerdict if confirmed
BepiColombo MORE γγ−1 = −1.998×10⁻⁵02027–20286.7σ detection of BD scalar → DCT confirmed
BepiColombo Shapiro−0.78 ns anomaly02027–2028Independent γ confirmation
Euclid M_lens/M_dynturnover at z~1.5, peak 1.301.00 (no turnover)2027–2029Smoking-gun gravitational slip
Euclid γ growth0.6950.55 (GR)2027–2029BD growth confirmed
CMB-S4 ΔN_eff+0.027 (Goldstone θ)02028–2030~1σ Goldstone signature
NANOGrav scalar mode7.6×10⁻²⁰ Hznone2030sPulsar-timing scalar tone
ELI-NP SchwingerE_cr(DCT) = 0.851·E_cr(QED)E_cr(QED)~2030Laboratory QED test
LZ/XENONnT WIMPσ_SI = 0 exactly (anti-prediction)model-dependent2026–2028any positive signal falsifies DCT

Full forward calendar with dates, instruments and falsification criteria: /tests/.

BEC reality test — is the DCT vacuum a real Bose–Einstein condensate?

A skeptic asks: is the BEC interpretation of the tie field P a genuine physical claim, or phenomenological language wrapped around an effective theory? A real condensate must satisfy specific consistency relations between its parameters — chemical potential μ, healing length ξ, sound speed c_s, boson mass m_BEC:

\(c_s^2 = \mu / m_{\rm BEC}\), \(\xi = \hbar / \sqrt{2 m_{\rm BEC} \mu}\), \(a_\dagger = c_s^2 / \xi\).

If the DCT vacuum's parameters extracted from independent domains (gravity, quantum, time) satisfy these relations, the BEC interpretation is real. Result: log₁₀(BF) = +4.34 — strong evidence (just below the Kass–Raftery decisive threshold of 5).

Sub-testPredictedObservedlog₁₀(BF)
Two μ extractions agree (gravity domain)factor 1×factor 3.5× (0.54 dex)+1.71
BEC formation time = Hubble timeratio ~1ratio 3.17+1.74
Sound speed subluminal, order-c0.1 < c_s/c < 10.56 c+0.30
Strongly condensed n·ξ³ ≫ 1≫ 15.2×10¹⁰³+0.30
Coupling order \(\mathcal O(0.01)\)g ~ 0.01–0.1g(P) = 0.020+0.30
Total+4.34

Verification script: bec_reality_test_v3.py. 10-route P₀ internal consistency: mean 0.8537 ± 0.0036; 4.5σ vs chance.

Sub-claim probability decomposition

Sub-claimProbability
Time depends on more than mass-energy95%
The "more" is specifically condensate density70%
BEC framework is correct75%
DCT polytope is the right microscopic theory55%
Survives BepiColombo MORE 2027–202872%
Survives Euclid DR1 (Oct 2026 → 2027–2029 lensing)72%

Deep dives

How to verify

Every numerical entry on this page is reproducible from three sources:

  1. Cluster paper — the per-prediction derivation chain. Twelve papers (DCT-FND-V2 + 11 cluster) deposited on Zenodo with reserved DOIs and published as PDF + LaTeX source on /papers/.
  2. Public archive — the underlying measurement. Each row above cites its canonical reference (Bertotti 2003 for Cassini γ; Wright 2025 for KiDS-Legacy S₈; Iess 2021 for BepiColombo MORE; Lelli–McGaugh–Schombert 2016 for SPARC; ACT DR6 for A_L; CODATA 2018 / PDG 2024 for fundamental constants).
  3. Verification script — a self-contained Python implementation that recomputes the prediction from the cluster-paper formulae and the public-archive data. Script index: /code/. Aggregate verifier: corpus.

References