The author develops the experimental layer of the framework introduced in the foundational Preprint I. Seven families of falsifiable predictions (F1–F7) are stated and matched to ten falsification criteria (F-T1–F-T10). The predictions cover: τ-window scaling laws under monitored feedback and non-Markovian memory; a 3-qubit ontological feedforward discriminator constructed to separate synchronisation-based from entanglement-based metric emergence; a directional-asymmetry test Δ(τ) with null control; a 4-qubit triangle-inequality test on the metric-compatibility regime; an asymptotic large-deviation consistency channel as cross-cutting envelope; a coherence-affected entropy-production consistency target; and a sync-rate scaling under Dicke collective dissipation. A worked-case reanalysis of Micadei et al. (2019) under the non-Markovian channel of P1 demonstrates non-vacuity of the framework on existing experimental data within a factor ≈ 2.5 on a nine-decade timescale range. The operational definition of the memory timescale τₘₑₘ was fixed prior to numerical evaluation as a matter of pre-registration discipline, with an analytic zero-crossing alternative computed for transparency and explicitly rejected under the conservative bound. A structured Nakajima–Zwanzig–TCL2 sketch indicating the sign and structure of the next-to-leading-order correction for the Micadei interaction Hamiltonian is provided in Appendix E-II, identifying this residual as a target for next-to-leading-order refinement in the smallness parameter (Φ_NM − 1).
The author develops the experimental layer of the framework introduced in the foundational Preprint I. Seven families of falsifiable predictions (F1–F7) are stated and matched to ten falsification criteria (F-T1–F-T10). The predictions cover: τ-window scaling laws under monitored feedback and non-Markovian memory; a 3-qubit ontological feedforward discriminator constructed to separate synchronisation-based from entanglement-based metric emergence; a directional-asymmetry test Δ(τ) with null control; a 4-qubit triangle-inequality test on the metric-compatibility regime; an asymptotic large-deviation consistency channel as cross-cutting envelope; a coherence-affected entropy-production consistency target; and a sync-rate scaling under Dicke collective dissipation. A worked-case reanalysis of Micadei et al. (2019) under the non-Markovian channel of P1 demonstrates non-vacuity of the framework on existing experimental data within a factor ≈ 2.5 on a nine-decade timescale range. The operational definition of the memory timescale τₘₑₘ was fixed prior to numerical evaluation as a matter of pre-registration discipline, with an analytic zero-crossing alternative computed for transparency and explicitly rejected under the conservative bound. A structured Nakajima–Zwanzig–TCL2 sketch indicating the sign and structure of the next-to-leading-order correction for the Micadei interaction Hamiltonian is provided in Appendix E-II, identifying this residual as a target for next-to-leading-order refinement in the smallness parameter (Φ_NM − 1).
This document formulates a pre-registered falsification programme for entanglement and wavefunction-collapse phenomenology in open quantum systems. The framework adopts a register-oriented convention: an entangled AB preparation is represented as a single non-factorisable boundary-informational unit, while A and B denote locally addressable access components used in the operational workspace for control, marginalisation, tomography, and state-level entanglement readout. Measurement is described as apparatus-channel activation of an addressed logical sector. This convention fixes the interpretation of the symbols, but the tests are stated entirely in terms of operational diagnostics. The core programme compares reconstructed open-system descriptions through irreversible entropy production, entropy flux, Landauer-deficit variables, dissipator-level synchronisation, non-Markovian memory response, entanglement-sudden-death threshold timing, and Sagawa–Ueda feedback-information saturation. Five pre-registered predictions are stated. P-EC1 tests the collective-versus-local Landauer-deficit ordering in a bright-sector Dicke benchmark. P-EC2 tests the finite-rate approach of an apparatus-channel deficit toward the readout-completed asymptote under continuous diffusive monitoring, formulated on a stationary-window ensemble estimator. P-EC3 tests the spectral dependence of the non-Markovian Landauer-deficit excess. P-EC4 compares the first concurrence zero-crossing (entanglement-sudden-death threshold) with thermodynamic relaxation timing. P-EC5 tests Sagawa–Ueda bound-saturation and saturation-curve behaviour under feedback information, including an operational proxy mapping for the Yada et al. iterative-feedback anchor. Each prediction is assigned a status in a decision tree with positive controls, quantitative windows, consistency bands, platform anchors, and explicit fail conditions. The programme distinguishes worked-case consistency checks from independent-platform primary falsification tests, and separates core falsification claims from near-future or conditional routes. A boundary-clock extension is also recorded as a non-conservative layer with its own handles; its near-dark chart-inversion observable, tracked by the bounded marker η_chart(t) and the integrated observable 𝐼ₖ₅, is reported as a conditional outlook, not as a core prediction. The document therefore does not claim to derive the Born rule, prove an ontology of collapse, or modify standard quantum mechanics. It asks whether a specific boundary-persistence architecture survives a set of pre-registered operational tests.
UIP is a candidate framework formalizing coherence, drift, inheritance, resonance, waste, and non-harm constraints as measurable control-theoretic and information-theoretic objects, governed by dC/dt = G(R,U) − L(D,W) subject to a hard non-harm envelope. This Phase 1 record contains three artifacts: (1) the preprint; (2) Appendix A — a single noisy qubit memory in which every UIP object is numerically specified, six preregistered falsification tests passed, and the fixed-point condition G = L predicted steady-state drift D* = 0.1032 vs 0.1051 simulated (within 2%); (3) Appendix B — a two-qubit test of inheritance-guided correction allocation, which FAILED its preregistered falsification condition in both version 1 and a preregistered version 2 across a full coupling sweep, reported in full with the diagnosed mechanism and a sharpened restricted-access boundary hypothesis (v3) left open for independent testing. All results are consistent with standard quantum mechanics, quantum information theory, and feedback control. This work demonstrates reduction to known science (Criterion 1) only; novel prediction (Criterion 2) and independent replication (Criterion 3) remain open. UIP is a candidate framework, not established science. Refutations are solicited as explicitly as confirmations; simulation code is published openly for reviewers to reproduce, vary, and attempt to break every result. Simulation code (open source): https://github.com/derekhone/uip-phase1-testbeds Version 2 adds Appendix C: a preregistered v3 test of inheritance-guided control under restricted access. Predictions were locked before execution. Result: robust pass at weak coupling (+3.5% over best baseline, N=100 seeds); loses at strong coupling. Full boundaries reported. Code: https://github.com/derekhone/uip-phase1-testbeds Version 3 completes Phase 1. Adds Appendices D–G and the synthesis manuscript. D/E: preregistered crossover point and zero-free-parameter law s*(γ) = arcsin(√(γ(1−C̄*)/C̄*)), C̄* = 1/1.45, confirmed across a γ-sweep (r = 0.976), with three-qubit generalization. F: negative result — decision quantities fall 12.19% (v3) and 22.06% (v4) short of a beam-search near-optimal adversary; control-sufficiency claim falsified and closed. G: negative result — C̄* does not transfer to a structure-matched classical system (no crossover exists); universality claim retired. Synthesis manuscript: four confirmed preregistered predictions, three falsified claims. No new physics is claimed. Version 4 adds Appendix H — the first hardware test, run on IBM Quantum (ibm_kingston, Heron r2, job d99brisqp3as739tudkg). The Appendix A fixed-point law, with the per-cycle decay computed from published calibration T2, FAILED its preregistered ±10% kill-condition (predicted D* = 0.0302, measured 0.1463, deviation 383.7%). Diagnosis: bare-idle decay is governed by T2*, not echo-T2; the fixed-point structure (flat steady state) was observed, but the input noise model is falsified on hardware. Sharpened hypothesis H2 (in-situ rate measurement or echo insertion) is preregistrable and left open. Preregistration was committed to the GitHub repository before execution. Ledger: 4 confirmed / 4 falsified — including one rejection delivered by hardware outside our control. FINAL VERSION — PHASE 1 CLOSED (July 12, 2026). This version adds Appendix I (H2a echo-protected hardware test) and the final complete synthesis paper, closing the Phase 1 falsification program. Final ledger: 4 claims confirmed, 5 falsified — including two preregistered hardware rejections of the author's own predictions on IBM Quantum's ibm_kingston processor (Heron r2, 156 qubits), both published unedited the same day. CONFIRMED (simulation): (A) single-qubit recirculation fixed point, steady-state drift predicted analytically within 2%; (C) restricted-access regime where inheritance-guided control is advantageous; (D–E) quantitative crossover law s*(γ), confirmed as preregistered. FALSIFIED: (B) inheritance-guided two-qubit control vs. static baseline, two preregistered versions; (F) near-optimality claim — 12.19% gap vs. a 5% threshold; (G) the universality claim — the word "Unified" was formally retired as a consequence; (H) the fixed-point law with published-calibration inputs on hardware — 383.7% deviation vs. a preregistered ±10% window (job d99brisqp3as739tudkg); (I) the same law with echo-protected idles correcting the diagnosed T2/T2* input error — 81.9% deviation (job Post-closure replication note (2026-07-13): The fixed-point law falsified in Appendix I was re-tested on a second device (ibm_marrakesh, qubit 2, preregistered, job d9airde6hjac73fegau0). Result: FAIL — measured D* = 0.0529 vs. predicted 0.0407 (30.1% deviation). The falsification is device-independent (kingston 81.9%, marrakesh 30.1%). Ledger unchanged: 4 confirmed / 5 falsified.
This paper reports the definitive test and falsification of FCLT Prediction 15c (pre-registered in Paper 52, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.19746102). The prediction held that consecutive T₁ decoherence timescale ratios in transmon qudits satisfy τₖ/τₖ₊₁ → φ ≈ 1.618, derived from depth-2 bath memory structure in the Nakajima–Zwanzig projection formalism. Using the measured T₁ coherence times of qudit Q5 from Blok et al. (2025), Table III, across 9 transition levels (k = 1–9), T₁ values plateau at ~13–14 µs from k = 6 onward, inconsistent with the φ⁻ᵏ decay model. At k = 9, the predicted T₁ is 1.4 µs versus the observed 13 µs — a factor of 9× discrepancy (χ² = 75.9, reduced χ² = 9.5). The plateau is consistent with a dielectric loss noise floor identified by Blok et al. The pre-registered falsification criterion is met. Prediction 15c is falsified. Short-range consistency at k = 1–3 is noted but cannot distinguish FCLT from the harmonic null model and is insufficient for confirmation.
We present a laboratory-constrained phenomenological framework linking controlled quantum coherence experiments to large-scale cosmological observables. Using experimental results from superconducting qubits subjected to structured low-frequency toroidal magnetic fields, we define a dimensionless coherence proxy, κ_lab = 0.728 ± 0.020, which captures both temporal decoherence suppression and spatial field uniformity. This observable is derived directly from measured enhancements in qubit relaxation time (T1), without modification to materials or circuit design. We then introduce a calibrated laboratory-to-cosmology bridge, mapping κ_lab into an effective coupling parameter within a coherence-driven cosmological framework. This mapping enables a quantitative pre-data prediction for an environmental modulation of the Hubble expansion rate:ΔH0/H0 = 0.73^{+0.21}_{-0.18}%,for the benchmark regime m_φ ~ H0 and α = 1. The key contribution of this work is not the assumption of a confirmed cross-scale mechanism, but the construction of a transparent and falsifiable bridge between a laboratory-measured coherence observable and a cosmological testable quantity. The prediction lies within the sensitivity range of DESI Year 3, enabling a clear binary test: • Detection of a ~0.5–1.0% environmental step supports the viability of scale-bridging coherence dynamics.• A null result constrains the phenomenological bridge while preserving the laboratory result as an independent demonstration of environmental coherence engineering. This approach establishes a new paradigm in which controlled quantum systems can serve as quantitative anchors for testing phenomenological extensions of large-scale physics, connecting laboratory coherence and cosmological expansion in a falsifiable framework.
Description: This paper introduces a thermodynamic time parameter τ = ∫C dt, where C[ρ,𝒜] quantifies the information accessibility of quantum state ρ within observable set 𝒜. We prove that entropy decrease with respect to τ is equivalent to information recovery from inaccessible degrees of freedom—a process realizable in quantum error correction (QEC) cycles. The framework predicts a measurable signature: QEC should exhibit 10-15% fidelity enhancement relative to standard quantum dynamics, arising from negative coarse-graining rates (dC/dt < 0) during syndrome measurement. The time-dependent field C(t) can be reconstructed from fidelity data via C(t) = -(1/Γ) d ln F(t)/dt, providing a falsifiable experimental observable. We present a detailed experimental protocol for trapped-ion systems, achievable with current technology. Statistical discrimination criteria distinguish this effect from conventional mechanisms (non-Markovian baths, leakage errors, SPAM errors, dynamical decoupling). The combined statistical power enables rigorous falsification. This work establishes quantum error correction as a testbed for emergent time dynamics and provides concrete predictions testable with current trapped-ion quantum computing platforms. Key contributions: Theoretical framework linking coarse-graining to emergent time Quantitative prediction: 10-15% fidelity enhancement in QEC Experimental protocol for trapped-ion systems Falsification criteria distinguishing from alternative mechanisms Document type: Preprint / Working Paper Date: December 2025
TSR-Q-1 presents a preregistered and falsifiable experimental protocol designed to test for structured late-time coherence residuals in superconducting transmon qubits. The protocol does not treat generic recoherence, non-exponential decay, or non-Markovian behavior as evidence for the proposed framework, since such phenomena may arise from conventional open-system mechanisms. Instead, it targets a specific normalized temporal scaling law, tₙ/T₂ = nᵏ, with the preregistered theoretical value k* = 1.4706, corresponding to the first two target locations t₂/T₂ = 2.7714 and t₃/T₂ = 5.0310. If the associated amplitude-scaling hypothesis is retained, the predicted ratio is A₃/A₂ ≈ 0.551. The accompanying computational validation package develops the analysis pipeline through five stages: preliminary signal injection, blind null testing, blind injection-recovery, multi-qubit global-k inference, and sensitivity mapping. The synthetic null models include stretched-exponential decay, 1/f^α correlated noise, random-telegraph/TLS-like contributions, slow drift, white noise, and device-to-device variability. These simulations validate the detectability, specificity, and sensitivity of the proposed analysis procedure under the tested synthetic noise families. They do not constitute experimental evidence for the existence of the predicted physical effect. The next stage is a preregistered hardware implementation using superconducting qubits, with device-specific null calibration, blind analysis, systematic controls, held-out replication, and, ultimately, independent experimental replication.