Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Recurso digital |
| Language: | |
| Published: |
Zenodo
2026
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.20038746 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
Table of Contents:
- <p>The Absolute Medium (AM) model derives quantum mechanics, gauge fields, and gravity from a pre-geometric elastic continuum governed by the Maximal Invariance Principle (MIP) and the Non-Linear Elasticity Principle (NLEP). Here we show that the<strong> explanatory power of AM does not depend on its ontological commitment to a physical substrate.</strong></p> <p>We extract the invariant core of AM— Update Hierarchy, dissociative pressure ε, Unity of Persistence, buffers, τ6 bound, and the distinction between real and false layers—and demonstrate that two alternative test ontologies- the Constraint–Coherence Field (CCF) and the Process–Relaxation Ontology (PRO), preserve every invariant prediction while rejecting medium realism.</p> <p>Finally, we formulate the <strong>Persistence Axiom (PA), a single rate-based condition that generates all three frameworks</strong> as distinct interpretations. This stress test proves that AM discovered a genuine structural law of coherence.</p> <p>The AM model remains the most concrete realisation, but <strong>its core contribution is the discovery of a universal persistence law.</strong> Future empirical work may discriminate among these ontologies, but their structural equivalence already demonstrates that the AM framework has reached a level of maturity comparable to the deepest principles in physics.</p>