Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Log inSign up
Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Blog
Job Board
Q3AS

© 2026 Aqora Quantum S.A.S.

TermsPrivacyLegal Notice

General Transfer-of-State Model (GTOSM) Double-Slit Timeline Evaluation at Π_R,el (GTOSM elastic recombination; dictionary-valid) — Numerical simulation with time and resolution-aware recombination-plane, Fraunhofer far-field baseline comparison

Radu Necsanu

Published Jan 15, 2026• 0 citations
Publisher

Abstract

This work does not claim to replace or modify quantum mechanics. This record demonstrates, with an explicit timeline separation and execution, fixed declared geometry and operational resolution, that the double-slit detected distribution on Π_D can be reproduced either by (i) evaluating the GTOSM elastic-recombination (direction-bundle) construction upstream on a resolution-aware recombination plane Π_R,el and mapping forward, or (ii) evaluating the standard far-field screen expression directly on Π_D. Core principles made explicit: (1) measurement is defined relative to an experimental discipline via declared operational resolution (Δz, Δx) and a separated evaluation plane Π_R,el versus detection plane Π_D; (2) timeline management is explicit—distribution formation occurs on an η=0 pre-measurement window, while recorded outcomes occur only at Π_D; (3) measurement definition (“where/when/what”) is realized by the Π_R,el (distribution formation) / Π_D (registration) separation; and (4) in the GTOSM context, collapse is localized and associated with a fermionic non-optimal transfer (η=1) at Π_D (not a screen-wide contraction). A companion DOI evaluates the same Π_R,el construction using standard QM under the same declared geometry and resolution, enabling like-for-like comparison of Π_D distributions under identical operational assumptions.Companion: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18250723 Dictionary: Symbol definitions for Π_R,el and η=0/η=1 are specified in the GTOSM Transition paper (Zenodo record: https://zenodo.org/records/18236842).Reproducibility: Run GTOSM_doi_qm_primary_two_methods_ALL_IMAGES.py to regenerate all figures/CSVs included in this record. Standalone follow-up work on: Necsanu, R. (2025). General Transfer-of-State Model (GTOSM): A Minimum Structural Reconstruction of Quantum Mechanics, Gravitation, and Cosmology.Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17992660ORCID: https://orcid.org/0009-0009-1281-9180 GTOSM Fundamentals (definitions): Necsanu, R. (2026). General Transfer-of-State Model (GTOSM): Foundations of Physics – Fundamentals From Continuous Fields to Discrete Update Mechanics.Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18166795

DOI
10.5281/zenodo.18251607

Related papers

General Transfer-of-State Model (GTOSM) Double-Slit Timeline Evaluation at Π_R,el (Standard QM) — Numerical simulation with time and resolution-aware recombination-plane, Fraunhofer far-field baseline comparison

Radu Necsanu

This work does not claim to replace or modify quantum mechanics. This record demonstrates, with an explicit timeline separation and execution, fixed declared geometry and operational resolution, the double-slit detected distribution on Π_D can be reproduced either by (i) evaluating standard QM upstream on a resolution-aware recombination plane Π_R,el and mapping forward, or (ii) evaluating the standard far-field screen expression directly on Π_D. Core principles made explicit: (1) measurement is defined relative to an experimental discipline via declared operational resolution (Δz, Δx) and a separated evaluation plane Π_R,el versus detection plane Π_D; (2) timeline management is explicit—distribution formation occurs on an η=0 pre-measurement window, while recorded outcomes occur only at Π_D; (3) measurement definition (“where/when/what”) is realized by the Π_R,el (distribution formation) / Π_D (registration) separation; and (4) in the GTOSM dictionary context, collapse is localized and associated with a fermionic non-optimal transfer (η=1) at Π_D (not a screen-wide contraction). A companion DOI applies the GTOSM elastic-recombination (direction-bundle) construction at the same Π_R,el under the same declared geometry and resolution.Companion: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18251608 Dictionary: Symbol definitions for Π_R,el and η=0/η=1 are specified in the GTOSM Transition paper (Zenodo record: https://zenodo.org/records/18236842).Reproducibility: Run qm_doi_qm_primary_two_methods_ALL_IMAGES.py to regenerate all figures/CSVs included in this record.Standalone follow-up work on: Necsanu, R. (2025). General Transfer-of-State Model (GTOSM): A Minimum Structural Reconstruction of Quantum Mechanics, Gravitation, and Cosmology.Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17992660ORCID: https://orcid.org/0009-0009-1281-9180GTOSM Fundamentals(definitions): Necsanu, R. (2026). General Transfer-of-State Model (GTOSM): Foundations of Physics – Fundamentals From Continuous Fields to Discrete Update Mechanics. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18166795

•Jan 15, 2026•0 citations

General Transfer-of-State Model (GTOSM): Foundations of Physics – Transition Calculus Core – From Continuous Fields to Discrete Update Mechanics

Radu Necsanu

This manuscript is the core mathematical reference that makes GTOSM operational as a closed, tick-by-tick update system and a strict translation layer to and from standard physics. It is deliberately non-narrative: it contains only primitives (with explicit symbolic forms and units), a fully specified one-tick state update map with ownership semantics, and a bidirectional dictionary that rewrites standard quantities (time, energy, momentum, phase, temperature, gravity images, etc.) in GTOSM primitives on declared coarse-graining windows. Two operative objects drive the document: Measurement as a physical registrar event: measurement is defined as a fermionic non-optimal transfer (η=1) at a boundary corridor, with explicit bookkeeping consequences (forced completion, constraint replacement, exported-bias deposition, and dimensional-adjustment accounting). Pre-measurement evolution is treated separately on η=0 windows via a unitary ledger representation where appropriate. Suppression of infinities by construction: continuum divergences are eliminated through a constrained replacement calculus that substitutes ill-posed limit expressions (UV integrals, δ-sources, denominator blowups, and strong-field singularities) with finite, bounded lattice surrogates, yielding computable error bounds and audit-ready conservation bookkeeping. The document closes the loop by stating correspondence theorems with checkable hypotheses (Born-rule emergence under a fixed hazard coupling, causal locality/no superluminal signalling, Schrödinger correspondence on η=0 windows, weak-field gravity images under calibrated closure, and thermodynamic-limit consistency). The result is a publication-grade, implementation-ready “dictionary-and-dynamics” standard: translate in, evolve under fixed rules, translate out—without per-phenomenon tuning.Standalone follow-up work on: Necsanu, R. (2025). General Transfer-of-State Model (GTOSM): A Minimum Structural Reconstruction of Quantum Mechanics, Gravitation, and Cosmology. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17992660ORCID: https://orcid.org/0009-0009-1281-9180GTOSM Fundamentals(definitions): Necsanu, R. (2026). General Transfer-of-State Model (GTOSM): Foundations of Physics – Fundamentals From Continuous Fields to Discrete Update Mechanics. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18166795

•Jan 13, 2026•0 citations

General Transfer-of-State Model (GTOSM): What Is Measured in Quantum Mechanics — Bosonic Duality Eliminated by Boson–Fermion Asymmetry

Radu Necsanu

The Measurement Questions (structural framing) Any complete account of quantum measurement must answer four logically distinct questions: What is measuredWhich physical identity component is registered in the measurement event? Pre-measurement evolution(context for the target measurement)What interactions occur between initial preparation and the designated target measurement, and how do they reshape or constrain the admissible evolution of the wavefunction? Where is it measuredAt which spatial location does the registrar event occur? When is it measuredAt which lattice tick does the registrar event occur? These questions are independent in definition but coupled in prediction: prior to realization, specifying one of {where, when} necessarily leaves the other probabilistic. Scope of this work This work resolves Question (1): what is measured. We show that: Bosons cannot be measured directly. A “boson measurement” is always the measurement of a fermionic non-optimal transfer induced by bosonic interaction. All registered outcomes are fermionic registrar events. Bosonic wave–particle duality is therefore not fundamental, but an artifact of fermionic detection. Questions (2), (3), and (4) — including explicit space–time prediction and pre-measurement evolution (e.g. elastic recombination) — are deferred to follow-up work. Standalone follow-up work on: Necsanu, R. (2025). General Transfer-of-State Model (GTOSM): A Minimum Structural Reconstruction of Quantum Mechanics, Gravitation, and Cosmology.Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17992660ORCID: https://orcid.org/0009-0009-1281-9180

•Jan 10, 2026•0 citations

Quantum Measurement Timeline Framework (QMTF)

Radu Necsanu

We introduce the Quantum Measurement Timeline Framework (QMTF): an operational, target-relative account of quantum measurement that is timeline-complete and probability-correct. Core idea Declare a measurement target explicitly: what is registered, where it is registered, and when it is admitted as “the measurement,” at stated finite resolutions. Treat “measurement” as a localized quantum instrument, not as “anything that interacts.” Pipeline Target frame: 𝒟* = { (x_i, t_j) } (declared spacetime bins on which the measurement is admitted). Pre-measurement output: a sub-normalized joint spacetime support f_xt(x_i,t_j) = Tr(ρ E_(x_i,t_j)) p_surv = Σ_(x,t)∈𝒟* f_xt(x,t) Prediction layers (explicitly separated): Per-run (unconditional): P_abs over 𝒟* ∪ {∅} Conditional (given survival): P_cond defined only when p_surv > 0 Null handling (explicit): Includes a null outcome ∅ and a null decomposition (missed target vs reporting shortfall). Formal guarantees (in Appendix A) Formation→detection plane equivalence (“timeline equivalence”): evaluate at a formation plane and propagate, or evaluate directly at detection—predictions agree (up to discretization). No-signalling for localized instruments (operational locality). Finite-resolution stability via coarse-graining: predictions are stable under binning and converge under refinement. Worked constructions + artifacts Double slit benchmark (standard screen statistics) with a resolution-aware recombination/formation plane. Which-slit variant using an explicit instrument, with a tunable decoherence factor. Photon baseline (no intervening interactions) to show the same target logic in the simplest case. Runnable computational artifacts are released alongside the manuscript, with quality gates for verification. Positioning QMTF is interpretation-neutral: it does not assume any ontology for ψ. It is compatible with time-of-event POVMs and dilation (as an optional compatibility note, not a required ingredient).

•Jan 15, 2026•0 citations

Reproducibility Archive for “Process-Relative Accessibility of Quantum Records” (version 1.3)

Kent Nimmo

Exact manuscript and Supplement sources, model configuration, generated numerical data, complete comparison channels, scientific figures, production code, unit tests, and separately implemented numerical verification for Process-Relative Accessibility of Quantum Records: Exact Operational Separations and Task-Sufficient Comparison. This version changes only the AI-use disclosure and release packaging/metadata, not the scientific models or results.

•Sep 20, 2026•1 citation

Quantum Mechanics Manifesto: Operational Rules

Radu Necsanu

Quantum Mechanics Manifesto: Operational Rules Author: Radu Necsanu ORCID: https://orcid.org/0009-0009-1281-9180 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18408348 Abstract This document specifies operational definitions and usage constraints governing the admissible application of quantum mechanics to declared measurements. It introduces no new postulates, modifies no dynamics, and advances no interpretive claims. The rules stated here fix terminology, delimit the role of measurement, and constrain the operational use of the formalism; as an executive closure, the document states explicit admissibility conditions for run-by-run randomized protocols in quantum-eraser–type experiments. Derivations and experimental analyses are explicitly outside scope.

•Jan 29, 2026•0 citations
This work does not claim to replace or modify quantum mechanics. This record demonstrates, with an explicit timeline separation and execution, fixed declared geometry and operational resolution, that the double-slit detected distribution on Π_D can be reproduced either by (i) evaluating the GTOSM elastic-recombination (direction-bundle) construction upstream on a resolution-aware recombination plane Π_R,el and mapping forward, or (ii) evaluating the standard far-field screen expression directly on Π_D. Core principles made explicit: (1) measurement is defined relative to an experimental discipline via declared operational resolution (Δz, Δx) and a separated evaluation plane Π_R,el versus detection plane Π_D; (2) timeline management is explicit—distribution formation occurs on an η=0 pre-measurement window, while recorded outcomes occur only at Π_D; (3) measurement definition (“where/when/what”) is realized by the Π_R,el (distribution formation) / Π_D (registration) separation; and (4) in the GTOSM context, collapse is localized and associated with a fermionic non-optimal transfer (η=1) at Π_D (not a screen-wide contraction). A companion DOI evaluates the same Π_R,el construction using standard QM under the same declared geometry and resolution, enabling like-for-like comparison of Π_D distributions under identical operational assumptions.Companion: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18250723 Dictionary: Symbol definitions for Π_R,el and η=0/η=1 are specified in the GTOSM Transition paper (Zenodo record: https://zenodo.org/records/18236842).Reproducibility: Run GTOSM_doi_qm_primary_two_methods_ALL_IMAGES.py to regenerate all figures/CSVs included in this record. Standalone follow-up work on: Necsanu, R. (2025). General Transfer-of-State Model (GTOSM): A Minimum Structural Reconstruction of Quantum Mechanics, Gravitation, and Cosmology.Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17992660ORCID: https://orcid.org/0009-0009-1281-9180 GTOSM Fundamentals (definitions): Necsanu, R. (2026). General Transfer-of-State Model (GTOSM): Foundations of Physics – Fundamentals From Continuous Fields to Discrete Update Mechanics.Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18166795
This work does not claim to replace or modify quantum mechanics. This record demonstrates, with an explicit timeline separation and execution, fixed declared geometry and operational resolution, the double-slit detected distribution on Π_D can be reproduced either by (i) evaluating standard QM upstream on a resolution-aware recombination plane Π_R,el and mapping forward, or (ii) evaluating the standard far-field screen expression directly on Π_D. Core principles made explicit: (1) measurement is defined relative to an experimental discipline via declared operational resolution (Δz, Δx) and a separated evaluation plane Π_R,el versus detection plane Π_D; (2) timeline management is explicit—distribution formation occurs on an η=0 pre-measurement window, while recorded outcomes occur only at Π_D; (3) measurement definition (“where/when/what”) is realized by the Π_R,el (distribution formation) / Π_D (registration) separation; and (4) in the GTOSM dictionary context, collapse is localized and associated with a fermionic non-optimal transfer (η=1) at Π_D (not a screen-wide contraction). A companion DOI applies the GTOSM elastic-recombination (direction-bundle) construction at the same Π_R,el under the same declared geometry and resolution.Companion: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18251608 Dictionary: Symbol definitions for Π_R,el and η=0/η=1 are specified in the GTOSM Transition paper (Zenodo record: https://zenodo.org/records/18236842).Reproducibility: Run qm_doi_qm_primary_two_methods_ALL_IMAGES.py to regenerate all figures/CSVs included in this record.Standalone follow-up work on: Necsanu, R. (2025). General Transfer-of-State Model (GTOSM): A Minimum Structural Reconstruction of Quantum Mechanics, Gravitation, and Cosmology.Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17992660ORCID: https://orcid.org/0009-0009-1281-9180GTOSM Fundamentals(definitions): Necsanu, R. (2026). General Transfer-of-State Model (GTOSM): Foundations of Physics – Fundamentals From Continuous Fields to Discrete Update Mechanics. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18166795
This manuscript is the core mathematical reference that makes GTOSM operational as a closed, tick-by-tick update system and a strict translation layer to and from standard physics. It is deliberately non-narrative: it contains only primitives (with explicit symbolic forms and units), a fully specified one-tick state update map with ownership semantics, and a bidirectional dictionary that rewrites standard quantities (time, energy, momentum, phase, temperature, gravity images, etc.) in GTOSM primitives on declared coarse-graining windows. Two operative objects drive the document: Measurement as a physical registrar event: measurement is defined as a fermionic non-optimal transfer (η=1) at a boundary corridor, with explicit bookkeeping consequences (forced completion, constraint replacement, exported-bias deposition, and dimensional-adjustment accounting). Pre-measurement evolution is treated separately on η=0 windows via a unitary ledger representation where appropriate. Suppression of infinities by construction: continuum divergences are eliminated through a constrained replacement calculus that substitutes ill-posed limit expressions (UV integrals, δ-sources, denominator blowups, and strong-field singularities) with finite, bounded lattice surrogates, yielding computable error bounds and audit-ready conservation bookkeeping. The document closes the loop by stating correspondence theorems with checkable hypotheses (Born-rule emergence under a fixed hazard coupling, causal locality/no superluminal signalling, Schrödinger correspondence on η=0 windows, weak-field gravity images under calibrated closure, and thermodynamic-limit consistency). The result is a publication-grade, implementation-ready “dictionary-and-dynamics” standard: translate in, evolve under fixed rules, translate out—without per-phenomenon tuning.Standalone follow-up work on: Necsanu, R. (2025). General Transfer-of-State Model (GTOSM): A Minimum Structural Reconstruction of Quantum Mechanics, Gravitation, and Cosmology. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17992660ORCID: https://orcid.org/0009-0009-1281-9180GTOSM Fundamentals(definitions): Necsanu, R. (2026). General Transfer-of-State Model (GTOSM): Foundations of Physics – Fundamentals From Continuous Fields to Discrete Update Mechanics. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18166795
The Measurement Questions (structural framing) Any complete account of quantum measurement must answer four logically distinct questions: What is measuredWhich physical identity component is registered in the measurement event? Pre-measurement evolution(context for the target measurement)What interactions occur between initial preparation and the designated target measurement, and how do they reshape or constrain the admissible evolution of the wavefunction? Where is it measuredAt which spatial location does the registrar event occur? When is it measuredAt which lattice tick does the registrar event occur? These questions are independent in definition but coupled in prediction: prior to realization, specifying one of {where, when} necessarily leaves the other probabilistic. Scope of this work This work resolves Question (1): what is measured. We show that: Bosons cannot be measured directly. A “boson measurement” is always the measurement of a fermionic non-optimal transfer induced by bosonic interaction. All registered outcomes are fermionic registrar events. Bosonic wave–particle duality is therefore not fundamental, but an artifact of fermionic detection. Questions (2), (3), and (4) — including explicit space–time prediction and pre-measurement evolution (e.g. elastic recombination) — are deferred to follow-up work. Standalone follow-up work on: Necsanu, R. (2025). General Transfer-of-State Model (GTOSM): A Minimum Structural Reconstruction of Quantum Mechanics, Gravitation, and Cosmology.Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17992660ORCID: https://orcid.org/0009-0009-1281-9180
We introduce the Quantum Measurement Timeline Framework (QMTF): an operational, target-relative account of quantum measurement that is timeline-complete and probability-correct. Core idea Declare a measurement target explicitly: what is registered, where it is registered, and when it is admitted as “the measurement,” at stated finite resolutions. Treat “measurement” as a localized quantum instrument, not as “anything that interacts.” Pipeline Target frame: 𝒟* = { (x_i, t_j) } (declared spacetime bins on which the measurement is admitted). Pre-measurement output: a sub-normalized joint spacetime support f_xt(x_i,t_j) = Tr(ρ E_(x_i,t_j)) p_surv = Σ_(x,t)∈𝒟* f_xt(x,t) Prediction layers (explicitly separated): Per-run (unconditional): P_abs over 𝒟* ∪ {∅} Conditional (given survival): P_cond defined only when p_surv > 0 Null handling (explicit): Includes a null outcome ∅ and a null decomposition (missed target vs reporting shortfall). Formal guarantees (in Appendix A) Formation→detection plane equivalence (“timeline equivalence”): evaluate at a formation plane and propagate, or evaluate directly at detection—predictions agree (up to discretization). No-signalling for localized instruments (operational locality). Finite-resolution stability via coarse-graining: predictions are stable under binning and converge under refinement. Worked constructions + artifacts Double slit benchmark (standard screen statistics) with a resolution-aware recombination/formation plane. Which-slit variant using an explicit instrument, with a tunable decoherence factor. Photon baseline (no intervening interactions) to show the same target logic in the simplest case. Runnable computational artifacts are released alongside the manuscript, with quality gates for verification. Positioning QMTF is interpretation-neutral: it does not assume any ontology for ψ. It is compatible with time-of-event POVMs and dilation (as an optional compatibility note, not a required ingredient).
Quantum Mechanics Manifesto: Operational Rules Author: Radu Necsanu ORCID: https://orcid.org/0009-0009-1281-9180 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18408348 Abstract This document specifies operational definitions and usage constraints governing the admissible application of quantum mechanics to declared measurements. It introduces no new postulates, modifies no dynamics, and advances no interpretive claims. The rules stated here fix terminology, delimit the role of measurement, and constrain the operational use of the formalism; as an executive closure, the document states explicit admissibility conditions for run-by-run randomized protocols in quantum-eraser–type experiments. Derivations and experimental analyses are explicitly outside scope.