• Home
  • Preface
  • Terms
  • MIT
  • Λ
  • CMB
  • Ψ(t)
  • a₀
  • H₀
  • The Waltz
  • Ask ΛI
  • More
    • Home
    • Preface
    • Terms
    • MIT
    • Λ
    • CMB
    • Ψ(t)
    • a₀
    • H₀
    • The Waltz
    • Ask ΛI
  • Home
  • Preface
  • Terms
  • MIT
  • Λ
  • CMB
  • Ψ(t)
  • a₀
  • H₀
  • The Waltz
  • Ask ΛI

Topology holds. Wave is. Particle samples.

Topology holds. Wave is. Particle samples. Topology holds. Wave is. Particle samples. Topology holds. Wave is. Particle samples.

λ = h/p as Identity

Topology holds. Wave is. Particle samples.

Topology holds. Wave is. Particle samples. Topology holds. Wave is. Particle samples. Topology holds. Wave is. Particle samples.

λ = h/p as Identity

Mode Identity Theory: From Topology to First Principles

Standard physics sees matter as fundamental: particles exist, and they sometimes behave like waves. Mode Identity Theory (MIT) inverts this. Waves exist, and the universe samples them; particles are the realized returns of that sampling. This is not a philosophical preference; it determines which questions are even well‑formed.


Standard physics treats time as a background coordinate through which the universe evolves. In MIT, time didn’t begin; it emerged as the boundary of our domain. Time is our phase position on the standing wave. “13.8 billion years” marks where we are on Ψ(t), not how long we’ve been waiting.


Standard physics treats the observer as external to the system. MIT treats the observer as constitutive to realization: the bounded domain where the wave resolves to finite value. The observer, √Ω, marks the position at which the ratio ∞/0 yields a defined number, spanning the Hubble radius to the Planck length.


While the standard model views space as uniformly three‑dimensional, MIT sees effective dimension as scale‑dependent: the horizon scales with 2D area, not with our local perception of 3D volume. The 122‑order discrepancy of Λ is not a “coincidentally large number” but the dimensional projection from where we stand.


And while the standard model often treats the anomalies of the Cosmic Microwave Background as accidental flukes, MIT sees them as the natural projections of a single topological framework; not flaws in the cosmos, but the reflection of the first light.


Feel free to start with the Preface


and Ask ΛI about MIT.

The Framework

Postulate

Cosmic Standing Wave

Boundary Conditions

S¹ = ∂(Möbius) ↪ S³, ∂S³ = ∅


A temporal edge (S¹) bounds a non-orientable surface (Möbius), embedded in a closed hypersphere (S³). 


The venue has no boundary.Everything else derives.

Boundary Conditions

Cosmic Standing Wave

Boundary Conditions

ψ(y + L) = −ψ(y)


The Möbius twist enforces anti-periodicity. 


This selects half-integer modes. Matter is fermionic.

Cosmic Standing Wave

Cosmic Standing Wave

Cosmic Standing Wave

Ψ(t) = cos(t/2)


Anti-periodicity requires return after two laps: Period 4π. 


Cosine places maximum at origin; the universe begins at amplitude, not zero-crossing.

120 Domain

Observer Position

Cosmic Standing Wave

S³ ≅ SU(2)


The largest discrete spinor symmetry is the binary icosahedral group: |2I| = 120. 


This grid is native, not imposed.

Fibonacci Wells

Observer Position

Observer Position

The golden ratio φ is maximally irrational. 


Its convergents, the Fibonacci sequence, mark the most stable sampling positions on the 120-grid.

Observer Position

Observer Position

Observer Position

√Ω ≈ 10⁶¹


The bounded domain spans the cosmic horizon (10¹²²) to Planck scale (10⁰).


The IR↔UV fixed point; the observer stands at the geometric center.

Scaling Law

Manifold Assignment

Manifold Assignment

A/Aₚ = (√Ω)⁻ⁿ · C(α)


A/Aₚ
  Observable amplitude in Planck units

(√Ω)⁻ⁿ
  Embedding dilution in manifold n

C(α) = 2sin²(πα)
  Phase amplitude at α on the 120-grid

Manifold Assignment

Manifold Assignment

Manifold Assignment

n = 1

   S¹ temporal edge

   the realized boundary (a₀ , H₀)

n = 2

   Möbius surface

   the cosmological mode Λ

n = 3 

   S³ venue

   curvature (null dark matter)

Active Wells

Manifold Assignment

Active Wells

F₇ — α = 13/120

     C(α) = 0.22


F₉ — α = 34/120 

     C(α) = 1.21


Antinode — α = 60/120

     C(α) = 2.00

Recovery

Distinct Predictions

Active Wells

a₀/aₚ

F₇ Predicted:            2.2 × 10⁻⁶² 

Observed:                 1.2 × 10⁻⁶²


H₀ · tₚ 

F₉ Predicted:            1.2 × 10⁻⁶¹ 

Observed:                 1.2 × 10⁻⁶¹


Λ · ℓₚ² 

Antinode Pred.:       3.0 × 10⁻¹²² 

Observed:                2.84 × 10⁻¹²² 

   (After 3/2 Geometric Cost)

Distinct Predictions

Distinct Predictions

Distinct Predictions

Two claims separate MIT from alternatives:


a₀(z) ∝ H(z)  

   the MOND scale evolves with expansion.


Λ = constant  

   apparent w(z) variation is inference artifact.


One postulate. No free parameters. 

Pre-Registered Predictions. Falsifiable October 2026.

Derive with us:

Attach Files
Attachments (0)

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

S¹ or ∅ (cos we are =)

© Mode Identity Theory 2025 

Powered by GoDaddy