CoR-Repository
COR-0001 — Constitutional Onboarding Record
Framework:
FFGFT — Fraktale Feldgeometrische Fundamentaltheorie (Fractal Field-Geometric Fundamental Theory), also T0 — Time–Mass Duality
Primary Author:
Johann Pascher
ORCID: 0009-0000-6518-4064
Primary Repository:
https://github.com/jpascher/T0-Time-Mass-Duality
Primary DOI:
10.5281/zenodo.21203746
Status:
Author-reviewed Constitutional Onboarding Record (Version 1.0)
Provenance:
The present version constitutes the framework author's reviewed constitutional declaration as accepted for inclusion within the Dot Theory Constitutional Onboarding Repository.
Note from the author before the record:
Thank you for preparing a draft and for the MCD/COR mechanism — the abstraction level is right, and a constitutional description is genuinely useful for FFGFT.
The submitted draft, however, describes a different framework. Its title ("Finite Field Geometric Field Theory"), its represented objects (native 6D carrier, observable projections, orientation-sensitive fingerprints, null carriers), its bridge chain (native carrier → measurement projection → observable data → backward reconstruction), and above all its claim-state (Standard-Model / QFT / particle derivation listed as non-admissible) are the constitution of Marcel Krüger's HLV audit programme, not of FFGFT.
That inversion matters, because FFGFT's defining claim is the opposite one: it derives Standard-Model constants from a single parameter. Booking those derivations as "not claimed" would record FFGFT as precisely what it is not.
The corrected record below is therefore pure FFGFT. The HLV audit programme is Marcel's framework and warrants its own COR; my role there is independent replication and audit review, not authorship, and it should not be co-recorded under my name.
1. Primitive commitments (accepted without internal derivation)
No fundamental contradiction exists between quantum mechanics and relativity; both are correct but incomplete, and a common geometric structure underlies them.
A single dimensionless parameter, ξ = 4/30000, governs the Standard-Model constants.
The foundational relation is the time–mass duality T̃·m = 1.
The carrier geometry is a compact 4-torus with Z₃ symmetry, T⁴/Z₃; the fractal dimension is D_f = 3 − ξ.
ħ and c are SI unit-conversion factors, not ontological primitives.
Structure (geometry) precedes physical interpretation; reality is richer than current measurement resolution.
2. Represented objects
The compact carrier T⁴/Z₃.
The parameter ξ and the associated ξ-field.
The Hilbert-space translation H = L²(T⁴) ⊗ ℂ³, a lossless (unitary) bijection between the geometric and algebraic representations.
The Z₃-circulant mass operator on the ℂ³ fibre.
The ξ^p mass ladder and the K_frak recursion.
Time as a logarithmic spiral (winding ratio e per 2π).
Two equivalent representations — 4-torus and matrix algebra (Dok 206) — of which the 4D representation is taken as closer to ontology (generative for the matrix, carrying winding quantum numbers).
3. Native operators
Z₃-circulant diagonalization on the ℂ³ fibre (its output includes the phase θ = 2/9 and r = √2).
The K_frak recursion operator R (scale flow / recursion).
Projection and decompactification maps (Type-I decompactification, Dok 270).
The unitary bijection between the torus (L²(T⁴)) and matrix (ℂ³) representations.
4. Bridge operators (FFGFT-internal, algebraically proven)
α = ξ·E₀² (the fine-structure constant from the recursion; E₀ absorbs the K_frak factor).
A Yukawa coupling g = m/v read as a ξ-ladder ratio.
Dimensional / group containment bridges to neighbouring frameworks: C₃ < A₅ and T⁷ = T⁴ × T³ (HLV ⊃ FFGFT dimensionally); the shared value θ = 2/9 arises on the FFGFT side as a Z₃-circulant output and on the HLV side as an A₅/φ interface value — a compatibility relation, not a mutual derivation.
FFGFT distinguishes three declared layers of claim (Dok 206 §11): core derivations (proven from ξ), bridges (algebraically proven), and reductions (plausibility sketches). Every claim is labelled by layer.
5. Current claim-state
Admissible — derived (core layer, proven from ξ):
the fine-structure constant α;
the charged-lepton masses;
the Koide relation Q = 2/3 (exact);
the phase θ = 2/9 and ratio r = √2 as Z₃-circulant diagonalization outputs (found, not fitted);
m_τ = 1776.969 MeV as a falsifiable prediction for Belle-II.
The charged-lepton sector is closed.
Programme — not yet derived (open, declared as such):
the full Yukawa matrix: quark masses, CKM/PMNS mixing, the CP phase;
whether the T⁴/Z₃ topology forces θ = 2/9 and r = √2 as a theoretical derivation (a forcing question, not a measurement problem).
Explicitly open / not claimed:
the H₀ / CMB link (Dok 166): the exponent 41/4 absorbs an SI unit conversion and is not a clean dimensionless derivation, so it is left open;
cosmological parameters (Ω_Λ, Ω_M, H₀) are treated as ΛCDM-pipeline outputs, not neutral tests of FFGFT (dark matter is interpreted within the ξ-field account; the cosmological sector is not a load-bearing claim).
6. Admissibility conditions
Claims are admitted only within their declared layer (core / bridge / reduction); a bridge or reduction is never presented as a core derivation.
P35 discipline: verify before claiming; "candidate" ≠ "derived".
Irrational / transcendental structure is handled analytically where it is load-bearing (e.g. Q = 2/3 exact via analytic cancellation; 2/(9π) transcendence via Lindemann–Weierstrass), not as an error term.
7. Audit protocol
A public correction register (Dok 190): K1–K4 and P1–P43, plus an R-series of cross-reference entries; nothing is silently overwritten, and superseded states are archived as documented error-states rather than deleted.
External falsifiable predictions carry the audit: m_τ = 1776.969 MeV (Belle-II); and a photon-vs-atomic Bell prediction (S = 2√2 exactly for massless photons, S = 2√2 − ξ for massive particles).
8. Revision conditions
A failed Belle-II m_τ measurement, or a failed Bell prediction, would falsify the corresponding core claim.
Model-openness is itself declared and bounded (Dok 275 no-closure result): the ~1.19% δ*/(1/φ³) residual is a declared physical openness, not a numerical artifact.
Revision is recorded in the correction register, not applied silently.
9. Residual localisation (ΛΞ)
Residuals and open points are localised to the specific document / operator, not propagated across the framework (e.g. the H₀ exponent is flagged open without unsettling the lepton-sector derivations).
Negative or open results are booked as localised notes (the R-series in Dok 190), consistent with explicit residual localisation.
10. Propagation statements
A derived core result does not license stronger ontological claims than its layer supports.
An open or negative result (e.g. the H₀ link) does not invalidate unrelated core derivations.
Propagation is therefore explicitly constrained by the three-layer discipline.
11. Successor states
Derivation of the full Yukawa matrix (quarks, CKM/PMNS, CP phase).
Resolution of the forcing question: whether T⁴/Z₃ topology forces θ = 2/9 and r = √2.
Experimental test of m_τ at Belle-II.
12. Framework admissibility history (FAH)
Origin: the conviction that QM and relativity share an underlying structure; ξ and T̃·m = 1 emerged from that search. α, Koide, and the lepton masses were recognitions/verifications, not derivation sources.
Progressive tightening of claim-state discipline through the correction register (K1–P43, R-series), including r_τ corrections (K2), renormalization-group → scale-flow/recursion reframing (P7/P8), and the resolution of θ = 2/9 as a diagonalization output rather than an "open target".
Ontological stance held throughout: Bell correlations are real but geometrically grounded on T⁴ (topological connection, not ontological nonlocality; Dok 230).
13. Constitutional Maturity Assessment
Repository note:
The Constitutional Maturity Assessment forms part of the Constitutional Onboarding process rather than the framework itself. Accordingly, this assessment is supplied by the repository maintainer following author review and is not considered part of the framework author's constitutional declaration.
Author note:
Maturity grading is the repository maintainer's assessment, not the author's, and is left to you. I have confined this record to recovering the constitutional architecture faithfully.
14. Repository Observation:
The initial constitutional recovery unintentionally conflated FFGFT with the independently governed HLV audit programme, in which the present author serves as reviewer rather than framework author.
Author review localised this constitutional conflation and resulted in the explicit introduction of the following principle into COR-0000:
One Constitutional Onboarding Record should recover one constitutional object. Independent frameworks, audit programmes and governance programmes should each possess independent Constitutional Onboarding Records, even where they share authors, collaborators or mathematical structures.
This observation formed part of the continuing development of the Constitutional Onboarding methodology and has subsequently been incorporated into the COR-0000 specification.
