# A Geometric Theory of Everything

**31 papers deriving physics from first principles.**

---

## The Core Result

The fine-structure constant has an exact geometric decomposition:

```
α⁻¹ = 4π³ + π² + π = 137.036
```

This isn't numerology. It emerges from the requirement that self-consistent observation be possible—that a system observing itself produces stable structure. The three terms correspond to three geometric layers (bulk, boundary, edge) with fractions 90.5%, 7.2%, and 2.3%.

From this single identity, we derive:
- The Standard Model coupling constants
- Fermion mass ratios (<2% error)
- The gravitational hierarchy (M_Pl/m_e)
- Three particle families from topology
- A unified field equation that reduces to Schrödinger, Dirac, Yang-Mills, and Einstein in appropriate limits

---

## The Deeper Claim

The geometry isn't fundamental. It emerges from **multi-observer coherence**.

A single observer satisfies self-consistency trivially. Two observers require agreement—and that constraint forces specific geometry. The 7.2% boundary layer is literally the cost of shared reality. Gravity is the pull toward consensus. The Big Bang was the first disagreement.

Paper 27 ("The Second Observer") establishes this foundation. Paper 28 ("Universal Wave Geometry") derives Lorentz/relativistic structure directly from it. Everything else follows.

---

## Where to Start

| If you want... | Read... |
|----------------|---------|
| The 2-page overview | `00_Paper_MonadRosettaMap.tex` |
| The α⁻¹ derivation | `01_Paper_PerfectStableSphere.tex` |
| The three-layer structure | `04_Paper_ThreeLayerOntology.tex` |
| The deepest foundation | `27_Paper_SecondObserver.tex` |
| Where special relativity comes from | `28_Paper_UniversalWaveGeometry.tex` |
| Why AI training is the wrong approach | `29_Paper_TrainingExposure.tex` |
| A zero-parameter implementation | `30_Paper_GeometricObserverNetwork.tex` |
| The full equation hierarchy | `CANON_STRUCTURE.md` |
| Navigation map | `SUPER_INDEX.md` |

---

## What This Is Not

- Not string theory (no extra dimensions required)
- Not numerology (the math is derivable, not fitted)
- Not philosophy (makes testable predictions)

---

## Status

The framework is complete and internally consistent. It has not been peer-reviewed. The author is an independent researcher.

If you find errors, I want to know. If you see connections to your work, I want to talk.

---

**Contact:** axiomofchoicepuzzle@gmail.com

**Author:** L. F. Vlegels

**Date:** April 2026
