Orientation-Conditioned Relative Phase in Weighted Light-Matter Networks
Kevin Brown
Orientation-Conditioned Relative Phase in Weighted Light-Matter Networks Kevin L. BrownOctober 2026 This paper presents a falsifiable quantum-optical hypothesis: whether the oriented structure of a bounded three-link interaction network can contribute a measurable relative phase beyond the predictions of conventional quantum electrodynamics and quantum optics. The experimental question is narrow. After ordinary optical path phase, material response, detector effects, nonlinear optics, geometric phase, synthetic gauge structure, chiral response, nonreciprocity, and other justified conventional mechanisms have been modeled or controlled, the proposal asks whether a residual phase remains that follows a predetermined transformation law set by the physical interaction network. Each auxiliary link is defined operationally by an independently measured reciprocal coherent coupling rate J_ij. With J̄ denoting the mean of J_12, J_23, and J_31, the orientation-sensitive shape variable is χ(J) = [(J_12 − J_23)(J_23 − J_31)(J_31 − J_12)] / J̄³, and the dimensionless interaction exposure is Ξ(J) = τ_int · J̄ · χ(J), which incorporates network shape, absolute coupling strength, and interaction time. The proposed phase is Φ_I = κ_IP · Ξ(J), represented by the effective unitary scattering map U_I(J) = exp[i κ_IP Ξ(J) (n_1 − n_3)/2], where κ_IP is an unknown dimensionless coupling coefficient. A balanced three-path interferometer converts Φ_I into a directly measurable detector contrast, C = (2√3/9) sin Φ_I. The experiment is preregistered around several independent checks rather than a single anomalous measurement: network-off, symmetric, and asymmetric-zero null configurations; sign reversal under physical mirror transformation; scaling across multiple network configurations and across absolute coupling strength at fixed shape; coherent-state and single-photon consistency tests; independently measured conventional-systematic controls; and a held-out mirror-pair endpoint at |χ| = 0.30, predicted with one frozen κ_IP. A pre-unblinding feasibility threshold sets the sensitivity at which the test is interpretable. The model is rejected at the tested sensitivity if a justified conventional mechanism explains the residual, if required nulls or transformation laws fail, if the predicted scaling is not observed, or if held-out configurations cannot be predicted using the preregistered parameter. Null results are interpreted as quantitative bounds on |κ_IP| rather than proof that an arbitrarily small interaction is impossible. The hypothesis is motivated by the Unified Informational Physics Ontology (UIPO), but the optical law is stated as an independent phenomenological realization: the test stands or falls on the preregistered phase law and does not require UIPO to be accepted. The paper does not claim that a nonzero effect has been observed, that standard quantum electrodynamics has been falsified, or that UIPO has been experimentally confirmed. Its purpose is to convert a proposed informational-physics relationship into a quantum-optical experiment explicit enough to be independently modeled, criticized, implemented, falsified, and replicated. Independent Laboratory Testing and Replication This research includes an Independent Laboratory Feasibility Brief designed to support external experimental assessment and replication. The brief identifies the minimum apparatus requirements, independently measurable coupling parameters, sensitivity targets, physical symmetry conditions, conventional-physics controls, and preregistration requirements. The proposed testing pathway begins with a limited feasibility assessment before proceeding to a full confirmatory experiment. Laboratories are encouraged to assess whether their existing equipment can implement the proposed three-link interaction network and distinguish the hypothesized phase from conventional optical effects. The experimental hypothesis remains unconfirmed. Both positive and null results are scientifically relevant when obtained under adequately controlled and preregistered conditions. Independent researchers are invited to evaluate, challenge, test, or replicate the proposal. Experimental teams retain scientific independence over their measurements, analyses, and conclusions
•Aug 20, 2026•0 citations