FAQ
Everything here is the expressed view of one author. The numbers do not ask to be trusted: each ships with a script that recomputes it. The interpretations do not claim to be more than one person's reading. The name is attached so that both have an address.
What is this?
A theory that one number — the fine-structure constant — is the signature of a geometry, and that the geometry, taken seriously, yields the particle masses, the dark sector, and the shape of observation itself. This Second Edition is the readable front; the full record is Edition 1.
Is it claiming to be proven true?
No. It claims to be internally complete and falsifiable — coherent down to a clearly-marked foundation, and carrying a standing list of exactly what would kill it (see Falsifiability). Whether it is true is for data to decide, not for more derivation.
What's the difference between the two editions?
The Second Edition is the reader-facing layer: spine essays, status labels, the falsifiability table. Edition 1 is the complete archive — 44 papers, 400+ verifiers, and every refutation along the way — preserved as provenance. Every Second-Edition claim links back to its Edition-1 derivation.
Why are the Clay / Millennium problems kept separate?
Because they are explorations, not results. The TOE-Lens track says, for each, what the theory suggests and exactly where it falls short of a proof. None is claimed as a resolution, and none sits in the load-bearing spine.
How do I check a claim myself?
Every quantitative claim ships with a verifier. Download the archive, find the relevant script, and run it: python3 verify_P<NNN>.py. It recomputes the number and prints PASS/FAIL. The numbers do not ask to be trusted.
Isn't “reality is self-observation” just metaphysics?
It is an interpretation, and it is labelled as one. The physics track stands without it: the constant, the masses, the dark sector and the falsifiers are all derivations you can follow and check without adopting the observer reading. The Interpretation track is offered separately, for those who want the meaning.
What would change your mind?
It is written down in advance. A dark-energy density outside [0.685, 0.695]; a confirmed near-maximal leptonic CP phase (the theory predicts CP-conserving, δ_CP = π); a heaviest-neutrino mass that a sub-0.5% JUNO/Hyper-K measurement pushes ≥3σ off 48.7 meV — a bar the oscillation global fit already strains (see the Falsifiability table); the direct measurement decides. Any one of those refutes a load-bearing claim. That list is the Falsifiability page.
