Jeromie Beasley · Compound Eye · Gravity Ledger Mixer

The Ledger Outlives the Metric

A finite operator can lose its metric and keep its record. Drive the dials, cross the wall, and watch what each theorem sees: the metric changes sign while the count and the trace-log carry on.

Built from the full research edition 6 of the paper (24 September 2026) and its proof package. Every number on these screens is computed live from the paper's formulas or copied from its gate logs.
30numbered results, all proved in the paper
23finite theorems in Lean
15supplied gate programs
31chart and contour checks
1failed prediction kept on the record
25paper families traced
Theorem 16 · an analytic wall without an exceptional point

Cross the wall. Mix the eyes.

One rank-one projector moves on a small chart: z = x + iy, w = x + iy², P = (1+zw)⁻¹ [[1, w], [z, zw]]. Its metric is positive on one side of y = 0 and indefinite on the other. The operator H = (2 + y/10)P + (5 + y/5)(I − P) keeps its two eigenvalues apart the whole way, so the contour count and the trace-log never flinch. Each eye below reads one quantity along the same dial.

chart map · sign of det g
the metric at this point
the ledger · λ-plane
det g
g_yy (the dial direction)
count N
record · constant
trace-log Z
record · moves smoothly
eigenvalue gap
no exceptional point
proxy det Q̂
indefinite on both sides
overlap above cap
‖∂yP‖, (∂yP)²
every enabled eye along the same dial
Cross two eyes

Each point is one value of y. Blue is before the wall, red after. Metric eye against ledger eye shows the whole thesis in one curve: the horizontal coordinate changes sign while the vertical one runs straight through.

Prediction → intervention → observation

Write what you expect before you move a dial. Snapshot, move, then record what moved. Trials stay in this page until you copy them out.

What every eye sees

Click a card to solo that eye on the scope.
Proposition 15 · GEOWALL-LEDGER-02 · SUBGRAV-04

The licence expires first. The record never notices.

A fixed six-level base D₀ = diag(2, 3, 20, −20, 35, −35) is probed along two tangent directions that tilt from Hermitian toward anti-Hermitian with a dial κ. The exact entry formula gives g(κ) = G_H − κ² G_A. The matrices G_H, G_A and the curvature coefficients here are recomputed from the gate's own seeded family, and they return the gate's wall κ* = 0.6271277514757786.

along the dial · three regions
unit set of g(κ)
the ledger · D₀ and its contour
det g
licence 4 det g − ω²
curvature ω
finite through both walls
region
record N, Z
2, log 6
|N−2| 4.4e−16 · |Z−Z_d| 6.7e−16
SUBGRAV-04 · each block reaches its own wall

From the gate log: 19 of 20 seeded operators produced a wall in the admissible range (seed 9 did not). Every block's licence wall lies inside its metric-definite region, and the summed record stays within 1.6×10⁻¹⁴ of its reference on every row, including on the walls.

Scope, from §7.1: every row of this experiment is evaluated at the same base point, so H and the projector are exactly constant and the record is flat by construction. This lens isolates what the tangent probes do. The moving wall, where the spectrum and the trace-log genuinely change, is the Wall mixer.
Proposition 4 · Theorem 10 · Corollary 11 · GEOWALL-RECIP-01 · GEOWALL-ROT-01

Only the round trip can carry a sign

A one-way transition strength is a square and has no sign. The sign lives in the round trip Q = M₊₋ M₋₊ / Δ². At a Hermitian point the return leg is the mirror of the outgoing leg and the gap is real, so Q = |M|²/Δ² ≥ 0. Open the system and the phases stop cancelling.

transition legs and the round trip
two-probe form · unit set
arg M₊₋ + arg M₋₊ − arg Δ²
Re Q
|M₋₊ − conj M₊₋|
mirror residual
two-probe det g
−[Im(ū₁u₂)]²
Cor. 11 at β = 0
GEOWALL-ROT-01 · rotation lifts W linearly
The reciprocity record
W at the instrument floor (28 points)≤ 1.1×10⁻⁷
|det g| on the reciprocal gate≤ 8.9×10⁻¹⁶
Non-reciprocal control W0.24 – 0.98
Parity suppression of the even bump2.4×10⁷
ROT-01 slope of W against a1.000
ROT-01 predicted sign change of det gfailed, kept

The rotation run lifted W exactly as predicted, but det g stayed negative at every tested point, so the predicted wall never appeared. The paper keeps that failure in its ledger.

Scope: Corollary 11 is proved for the normalized single-partner, two-probe bilinear form. A sum over partners, a larger cluster, or probes that break the same pairing can behave differently, and the phase-related pair above shows a definite restriction is algebraically possible. The round-trip model on this lens is a live two-level toy built for this mixer; it is not the paper's Figure 2 operator.
Theorem 6 · Corollary 7 · INERTIA-05

The full tangent space is split exactly in half

Put an idempotent in the form diag(I_k, 0). Every tangent is off-diagonal, D = [[0, X], [Y, 0]], and the trace form is q = Re Tr(XY). With U = (X + Y†)/2 and V = (X − Y†)/2 it becomes q = ‖U‖² − ‖V‖²: as many positive directions as negative, 2k(n − k) each. The self-adjoint tangents are the slice V = 0, which is why a Hermitian family never sees a negative direction.

q = ‖U‖² − ‖V‖²
real tangent dimensions of a rank-k idempotent
q(D) = Re Tr(XY)
‖U‖²
positive part
‖V‖²
negative part
signature (n₊, n₋)
always balanced
toy census: definite planes
INERTIA-05 · what a chosen direction space reports

Recorded, not recomputed: the self-adjoint control reads (48, 0, 49) on its 97 directions; the open horizon generator reads (96, 98, 0) on its 194 potential-plus-damping directions, and (86, 11, 0) on potentials alone. Among random planes of that 194-direction form, 24.0% of 2-planes and 3.2% of 3-planes read as definite, and none from dimension 5. The live census above draws planes from a toy neutral form so you can watch the same effect happen; its percentages belong to the toy.

Corollary 7: a measured form is the pullback of q to a chosen perturbation space, so its inertia belongs to that choice. The 194 directions are a specified ansatz, not the full tangent space of a 194 × 194 generator, whose real dimension is 75,272. The exact half-split is the theorem about the full space.
Theorem 1 · Theorem 8 · Corollary 9 · Corollary 16A

A negative direction pushes the overlap above the cap

For orthogonal projectors the overlap Tr(PR) is a sum of squared cosines and cannot exceed the rank. An oblique projector projects along a slanted kernel, and its overlap can. Theorem 8 turns this into a local law: Re Tr(P(0)P(t)) = k − ½ Re Tr(D²) t² + o(t²), so a direction with g(v, v) < 0 climbs above k for every small step.

oblique projection in the plane
overlap excess along the chart, step h
Tr(PR)
cap k
1
rank of each projector
orthogonal value cos²θ
Theorem 1
chart excess at h = 1/4
The exact overlap

Re Tr(P(0,y) P(0,y+h)) − 1 = h²(2y + h) / [(1 − y³)(1 − (y + h)³)]

The sign of the excess is the sign of 2y + h. On the positive side the local quadratic term is negative, but a finite step can still climb above the cap: at y = −1/10 and h = 1/4 the excess is the exact rational 25000/7980973. On the wall itself the first term is cubic, h³/(1 − h³), and changes sign with h.

Proposition 14 · Proposition 20 · Proposition 17 · CLOCK-EXPONENT-01

What the record keeps, what it forgets

Three short stories about the scalar record. A Jordan block breaks the eigenvectors but not the trace. A determinant forgets whole turns of 2πi that the trace-log keeps. And a vanishing order sets the power law you would read off as a clock.

Jordan trace (Prop. 14)
count N
2
Z = log(4 − t)
|λ₁ − λ₂| = 2√|t|

At t = 0 the two eigenvalues meet and only one eigenvector is left. The contour around both still counts 2 and the trace-log still reads log 4. What the trace loses is the nilpotent part, which the full matrix f(J) keeps.

The wrap (Prop. 20)
det R
wrap w
defect δ = 4 sin²(π/d)

With UV = e^(2πi/d) VU, the relator R = UVU†V† is e^(2πi/d) times the identity. Its determinant is exactly 1 at every d, while the sum of its eigenvalue angles is one full turn. As d grows the defect collapses; the integer stays. At d = 2 the eigenvalue sits on the branch cut and the wrap is undefined.

Vanishing order (Prop. 17)
line-element exponent
zero type

√|λ| grows as |t|^(m/2). A transverse crossing (m = 1) gives 1/2; a touching zero (m = 2) gives 1. The gates measured 0.5154 on the crossing case and 0.9934 on the touching case. The paper keeps these as exponents only: matching a power to a horizon lapse needs a physically fixed parameter first.

Theorem 26 · Corollaries 27–28 · Counterexample 29 · Proposition 30

Press on the operator and read the record move

The bridge to Light Keeps the Ledger. Add a source, K → K + t·bb†, and the selected trace-log changes at the rate b† P_C K⁻¹ b. For a positive self-adjoint K that is a positive spectral weight, Σ λ⁻¹ ‖P_λ b‖², and a family of such readings rebuilds the selected subspace. For an oblique K the same rate can go negative.

response q_C(b) on every unit source
complete finite source tomography
q_C(b), finite difference
rate of the selected trace-log
b† P_C K⁻¹ b
Theorem 26
P_C unchanged by α
projector and metric
Z shift k·log α
record shifts
rate × α
source rate scales 1/α
oblique response with positive eigenvalues
Counterexample 29, live

K = S diag(2, 5) S⁻¹ = [[2, 3s], [0, 5]] and P_C = [[1, −s], [0, 0]]. For b = (1, 1) the rate is exactly 1/2 − s/2.

rate b†P_C K⁻¹ b
eigenvalues
2, 5
always positive

At s = 3 the rate is −1 and the selected eigenvalue's derivative is −2, as in the paper. The kernel of the oblique projector tilts, so b is projected onto the negative side of the range line. Nothing thermodynamic is negative here; the positive readings of Corollary 27 need a self-adjoint K.

Tomography assumes a known inner product, calibrated sources, a physical way to add tbb†, and access to enough sources. It does not say an optical frequency or a rotation curve supplies these readings. This lens uses a real symmetric K = U diag(2, 3, 8) Uᵀ, so the imaginary probes read zero.
§14 · Proposition 24 · Proposition 25 · Figure 8

A screen that reads Newton up close and MOND far out

Assume a spherical screen with N_A = 4πr²c³/(Għ) slots, the Unruh relation k_BT = ħa/(2πc), and a thermal mode density ρ_p(ω) ∝ ωᵖ up to a cutoff. The energy balance becomes a·f_p(a/a_D) = GM/r². With a flat density (p = 0), f → 1 gives Newton and f ≈ (π²/6)(a/a_D) gives the deep-MOND law a ≈ √(a₀ a_N), with a₀ = 6a_D/π².

acceleration relation · residual against the fit
test particles on circular orbits
circular speed against radius
screen a / a₀
RAR fit a / a₀
McGaugh–Lelli–Schombert fit function
log₁₀(a / a_RAR)
dex
deep coefficient
high-acceleration offset a − a_N
a_D/4 = π²a₀/24
4.93×10⁻¹¹ m s⁻² if a₀ = 1.2×10⁻¹⁰
a_N/a₀flat-density a/a₀empirical fit a_RAR/a₀log₁₀(a/a_RAR) dex

The table is recomputed here and matches the paper's to every printed digit. Over an 801-point sweep the largest gap is −0.07954 dex near a_N/a₀ = 0.372, where the screen gives about 0.833 times the fit. SPARC's own residual width about its fit is 0.11 dex.

These are conditional curves. The screen count, the temperature law and the mode density are assumptions, not results of the finite theorems, and the comparison is to a published fit function, not to galaxy data. Proposition 25 shows the trap: with any finite number of modes the deep branch collapses, so a strict MOND law needs a controlled continuum or zero-mode mechanism. Lensing, clusters and a relativistic field equation are still open.
§13 · Proposition 23 · the imported form-space action

Eleven slots and one Einstein coefficient

Take the form space of a four-dimensional spacetime: scalars, one-forms and two-forms, 1 + 4 + 6 = 11 slots. Put the curvature on it and expand the trace-log: −Tr₁₁ log(I − βℝ) = 3βR + (β²/2)(R² + R_μνR^μν + R_μνρσR^μνρσ) + …. Each sector's trace is R, so the leading term is 3βR, and β = ℓ_P²/(48π) gives the Einstein–Hilbert normalization 1/(16πG).

constant curvature: eigenvalues R, R/4 (×4), R/6 (×6)
exact trace-log against its series
health gate on the imported completion
exact −Σ log(1 − βλ)
3βR
3βR + 17β²R²/24
action coefficient 3β/ℓ_P⁴
This is a recovery inside an added action, with G entering through ℓ_P. It does not come from the finite projector data. For the unrestricted metric-only vacuum completion, Pereira finds a massive spin-2 branch with m₂² = −6/(5β), tachyonic for β > 0, and a scalar with m₀² = 3/(5β); his September 2026 follow-up adds a tensor-propagation obstruction on generic FLRW backgrounds. Those gates bind the imported completion, not the paper's finite lemmas.
Proposition 21 · Proposition 22

The record is not a relative entropy, and it is not the geometry

Two limits on what the scalar record can be. Proposition 21: with H = λP + μ(I − P) the projector and the selected eigenvalue can be varied separately, so the trace-log and the metric do not determine each other. Proposition 22: a same-reference relative entropy is at a minimum when the states coincide, so its first derivative is zero; the moving wall's record increment starts with slope 1/20. No constant multiple can match them.

projector and record move separately
record increment against c × relative entropy
g_xx = (1 + x²)⁻²
geometry moves with P
Z = log λ
record moves with λ
Fisher coefficient I_yy(0)
1/49000
where g_yy(0,0) = 0
D(ρ(y)‖ρ(0)) near 0
y²/98000
slope zero at y = 0
The two-level ρ_eig used for the bowl is the chart's positive spectrum normalized by hand; an oblique operator does not thereby become a density matrix. Dorau and Much use relative entropy of quantum-field states on a horizon and then assume an area relation. A different state pair could still be built; it would have to be specified and proved.
The argument, in the order the paper makes it

The ride

§§21–23 · what is proved, what is measured, what is assumed, what is open

Claim ledger

Evidence grades used on every card
T · written proofL · Lean-checked algebraN · numerical or symbolic controlC · cited literatureH · physical hypothesisR · recorded gate outputF · failed prediction, kept
ResultWhereStatusScope
Kept on the record
    What would defeat the simplest physical route (§22)
      What this mixer is allowed to say. The finite theorems are proved within their hypotheses. The gravity bridges are conditional: the Einstein coefficient comes from an added four-dimensional action, and the Newton and MOND limits come from a separately assumed screen and mode density. No spacetime metric, entropy–area law, universal MOND scale, lensing law or covariant field equation follows from the finite hypotheses. Those are the admission tests for a physical operator.

      Sources