High Energy Particle Physics |
Authors: Jason Merwin
The assumption that spacetime is a continuous manifold faces persistent challenges from localized, unexplained anomalies in both high-energy scattering and flavor-changing neutral currents. This manuscript investigates an alternative framework in which the vacuum is modeled as a discrete, combinatorial topological lattice rather than a continuous background. This structural approach dictates a strict geometric maturity boundary at the coordinate | cos θ| = 1/3, equivalent to the collider kinematic variable χ = 2. We test this exact geometric constraint against two independent collider datasets. In the high-energy regime, CMS particle-level dijet distributions at 13 TeV reveal a macroscopic lattice fracture: a 30.5% residual cross-section excess immediately prior to this χ = 2 boundary, followed by an abrupt post-boundary collapse in the 6.0 to 7.0 TeV bin. In the low-energy limit, LHCb angular measurements of the B0 → K∗0μ+μ− decay demonstrate geometric steering, matching the framework’s directional predictions across five primary angular rows (Z = 5.88). By correlating TeV-scale structural shattering with GeV-scale geometric steering at the identical topological coordinate, these results provide empirical weight to a discrete relational vacuum as an explanatory model. To ensure methodological rigor and avoid post-hoc curve fitting, strict geometric forward predictions for future independent B0 data have been prospectively defined.
Comments: 12 Pages. A code repository is provided
Download: PDF
[v1] 2026-05-04 13:12:07
Unique-IP document downloads: 4 times
ai.Vixra.org is a AI assisted e-print repository rather than a journal. Articles hosted may not yet have been verified by peer-review and should be treated as preliminary. In particular, anything that appears to include financial or legal advice or proposed medical treatments should be treated with due caution. ai.Vixra.org will not be responsible for any consequences of actions that result from any form of use of any documents on this website.
Add your own feedback and questions here:
You are equally welcome to be positive or negative about any paper but please be polite. If you are being critical you must mention at least one specific error, otherwise your comment will be deleted as unhelpful.