This preprint develops Admissible Probability as the future-facing, law-conditioned openness of present physical morphology. It presents a QFA-governed ontology of lawful but non-prewritten realization, one-history record formation, Born-rule custody, causal locality, one-way Time, entity identity, and emergence across physical scales. The work does not propose a new probability measure or a completed collapse mechanism; instead, it establishes the conceptual and structural framework for a successor program testing whether physical categories can be translated into the morphology–law–admissibility–realization architecture without contradiction or auxiliary machinery.
This preprint develops Admissible Probability as the future-facing, law-conditioned openness of present physical morphology. It presents a QFA-governed ontology of lawful but non-prewritten realization, one-history record formation, Born-rule custody, causal locality, one-way Time, entity identity, and emergence across physical scales. The work does not propose a new probability measure or a completed collapse mechanism; instead, it establishes the conceptual and structural framework for a successor program testing whether physical categories can be translated into the morphology–law–admissibility–realization architecture without contradiction or auxiliary machinery.
This paper proposes a structural framework in which physical laws and quantum probability emerge from a common admissibility principle, rather than from the unification of dynamical equations.No new forces, fields, particles, or dynamical laws are introduced.Instead, a universal structural constraint governing which states are admissible as physically realizable is identified. Building on results established in Admissibility Frameworks I and II, the existence of a universal frame constant limiting allowable transitions is taken as a starting point.From this principle, an equation of existence is formulated, which does not describe time evolution but instead delineates the boundary between admissible and non-admissible states.Different physical interactions are shown to correspond to distinct structural interpretations of the same admissibility condition. Within this framework, quantum states are interpreted not as probability amplitudes but as admissibility distributions.Measurement is described as structural filtering at the admissibility boundary, rather than as a dynamical collapse process.Under minimal and physically natural assumptions—phase invariance, orthogonal additivity, and locality—the admissibility measure is shown to be uniquely quadratic, yielding the Born rule as a structural consequence rather than a postulate. The resulting theory reframes unification as the closure of existence conditions shared by all physical theories.Dynamics remain domain-specific, but admissibility is universal.In this sense, unification is achieved not by combining forces, but by identifying the single structural condition under which any physical state may exist. AI Usage Declaration: The core concepts and mathematical intuitions of this paper were conceived by the author (Byeong-Young Oh). The technical formalization of the mathematical framework and the English drafting process were performed in collaboration with Artificial Intelligence (AI) models. The author takes full responsibility for the contents and logical integrity of this work. This work is part of an ongoing independent research program. Official research index :https://jingyu-papa.github.io/publications/
This paper develops a reconstruction of probability that does not begin by assuming a probability space, a probability simplex, or the Born rule. Instead, it asks a prior foundational question: under what physical and mathematical conditions are a set of alternatives entitled to carry positive, additive probabilities at all? The construction begins with lawful histories, future interfaces, and retained records. It distinguishes coherent alternatives from exclusive empirical events, preventing multiple interfering routes from being mistaken for separate probabilistic outcomes. A future-sufficient quotient identifies distinctions that no admitted future test can detect, while a record-qualification step determines when alternatives have become genuine empirical events. Dagger-compatible comparison and positive record factorization then produce a positive comparison kernel, from which normalized event probabilities arise only after the relevant record sectors are certified as exclusive. The framework is extended beyond individual measurements. Compatible finite record refinements generate a global probability measure under explicit realizability conditions; stochastic kernels provide a compositional calculus for carrying probabilistic information through unresolved future structure; and locally classical measurement contexts are assembled into a single positive state on a generally non-Boolean effect structure. This allows globally coherent probability to exist even when no context-independent deterministic assignment of outcomes exists. On a reflection-positive Hilbert-space branch, admissible future contexts are represented by positive effects and positive normalized states by density operators. The Born state-effect law then appears as the finite-dimensional representation of a probability structure that has already been earned through record qualification, positivity, exclusivity, refinement, and contextual consistency rather than introduced as a primitive postulate. The paper also separates two mechanisms that are often conflated: quadratic Born-type weighting arises from dagger self-comparison, whereas equal probabilities for symmetric alternatives arise from symmetry of the outcome structure. A further state-effect bridge analysis classifies residual coordinate freedom and identifies an exceptional rank-two adjugate transformation with Lorentzian signature, which is removed when positive self-dual identification is required. The central interpretation is that probability can function as a lawful form of global completion: it can carry future-relevant law through unresolved structure even when deterministic uniqueness is unavailable. The paper does not derive a mechanism selecting one actual outcome and does not claim that every physical sector satisfies the stated hypotheses. Instead, it provides an explicit dependency-controlled architecture connecting lawful completion, reflection positivity, event qualification, contextuality, stochastic continuation, Hilbert reconstruction, and the Born rule.
This paper proposes the Seven Rules of Admissibility as a minimal ontological framework for understanding how a coherent reality of continual becoming is possible. Rather than replacing established physics, the framework identifies the relational conditions that appear necessary for distinguishable states, ordered transitions, maintained identity, accumulated coherence, transformation, and constrained interaction. The paper distinguishes between foundational admissibility (universal relational conditions), situational admissibility (locally conditioned possibilities), and realization (what actually occurs within a particular relational history). It argues that increasing complexity need not arise from an ever-growing number of fundamental principles, but may instead emerge through the accumulated consequences of a small set of consistently applied relational conditions. The Seven Rules are presented as an ontological proposal rather than a new physical theory. Existing empirical descriptions provided by quantum mechanics, relativity, thermodynamics, and the other physical sciences remain unchanged. The purpose of the paper is to examine the minimal relational architecture that would allow those physical descriptions to participate in one coherent and continuously developing reality. This paper serves as the first publication in a planned ontological sequence exploring admissibility, foundational ontology, persistence, accumulated reality, and the emergence of increasingly complex relational organization.
This preprint develops the I↔M hypothesis, a speculative ontological framework in philosophy of physics that interprets physical reality as an ultrafast local alternation between two limiting regimes: an informational phase (I-phase) and a manifestation phase (M-phase). In this vocabulary, information denotes the totality of accumulated relations, interactions, traces, and constraints that determine which continuations of a system remain physically admissible. An M-fact arises through factualization when an M-event crosses a factual threshold and leaves a distinguishable M-trace that enters subsequent causal history. The degree to which a fact becomes embedded in causal history is described by factual depth. The framework introduces the concepts of continuation profile, M-pattern, twilight regime, transition inheritance, causal compression, continuity cost, reconfiguration cost, event tempo, and co-possibility structure. It offers an ontological reading of the quantum-classical transition, physical records, causal continuity, time, gravity, the recurrence of laws, and the emergence of complex organization. The proposal does not replace quantum mechanics, general relativity, or the Standard Model; it does not derive the numerical values of c, ħ, or G; and it does not claim an experimentally confirmed mechanism. It is intended as a conceptual and philosophical contribution for critical discussion and future formalization.
This preprint develops the I↔M hypothesis, a speculative ontological framework in philosophy of physics that interprets physical reality as an ultrafast local alternation between two limiting regimes: an informational phase (I-phase) and a manifestation phase (M-phase). In this vocabulary, information denotes the totality of accumulated relations, interactions, traces, and constraints that determine which continuations of a system remain physically admissible. An M-fact arises through factualization when an M-event crosses a factual threshold and leaves a distinguishable M-trace that enters subsequent causal history. The degree to which a fact becomes embedded in causal history is described by factual depth. The framework introduces the concepts of continuation profile, M-pattern, twilight regime, transition inheritance, causal compression, continuity cost, reconfiguration cost, event tempo, and co-possibility structure. It offers an ontological reading of the quantum-classical transition, physical records, causal continuity, time, gravity, the recurrence of laws, and the emergence of complex organization. The proposal does not replace quantum mechanics, general relativity, or the Standard Model; it does not derive the numerical values of c, ħ, or G; and it does not claim an experimentally confirmed mechanism. It is intended as a conceptual and philosophical contribution for critical discussion and future formalization.