Experimental validation roadmap

Testing the Quantized Dimensional Ledger in the Lab

The QDL framework is built to be falsifiable. A conserved 3L + 2F Quantized Dimensional Cell (QDC) and ledger-closure rules generate specific predictions for how physical quantities should scale in carefully designed experiments. This page outlines four complementary platforms—torsion balances, NV-center frequency shifts, cavity scaling, and metamaterials—that can test whether nature follows QDL’s prediction-filter structure or standard dimensional expectations alone.

3L + 2F Prediction Filter
Ledger-Based Scaling Laws
Independent Experimental Platforms
Falsifiable Coherence Structure

Program overview

From dimensional closure to tabletop tests: how QDL connects ledger equations to measurable signatures.

Dimensional closure as an experimental guide

In QDL, every field, coupling, and observable is represented as a 5-component integer ledger vector in a 3L + 2F basis. Interactions must close onto an integer multiple of the Quantized Dimensional Cell. When this closure principle is applied to experimental observables, it yields:

  • Specific predictions for how measured quantities should scale with geometry and control parameters.
  • Constraints on which combinations of constants can appear in empirical fits.
  • Alternative dimensional relations that can be tested against standard theory.

The experimental program is therefore a direct test of the prediction-filter architecture: if QDL-based scalings fail systematically, the framework is falsified. If they are supported, the ledger structure gains empirical weight.

Key references

Primary experimental and phenomenological references in the QDL program:

These build on the broader prediction-filter and quantum-gravity framework:

Torsion-balance experiments

Ledger-based torque and deflection scaling vs. arm length, mass distribution, and environmental fields.

Concept

Precision torsion balances are highly sensitive to small forces and are a natural platform for testing QDL scaling laws. In the ledger picture, the torque, deflection angle, arm length, and test-mass configuration are all assigned ledger vectors, and the net dimensional content must close onto the QDC when combined with the relevant fields and constants.

QDL predicts specific exponent relations among:

  • Arm length and test mass geometry.
  • Restoring torque and angular deflection.
  • Gravitational and non-gravitational contributions.

Deviations from conventional scaling—when analyzed in a ledger-consistent way—would indicate a dimensional-closure structure beyond standard expectations.

Status and next steps

The QDL Experimental Validation Protocol outlines torsion-balance setups in which QDL and standard theory give clearly distinguishable length- and mass-scaling predictions. Experimental collaborations are invited to:

  • Map existing torsion datasets into a 3L + 2F ledger representation.
  • Design new runs with systematic variation of arm length, mass distribution, and shielding.
  • Compare fit quality and residuals for QDL vs. standard scaling assumptions.

Reference: QDL Experimental Validation Protocol – 10.5281/zenodo.17654442

NV-center frequency shifts

Coherent ledger fields and spin-resonance signatures in solid-state defects.

Concept

Nitrogen–vacancy (NV) centers in diamond provide a precise spin-resonance probe that can be engineered into well-controlled environments. QDL expects that certain combinations of applied fields, geometry, and constants will exhibit ledger-coherent frequency shifts tied to the 3L + 2F structure.

In the ledger description, the observed frequency shift \(Δ\omega_{NV}\), applied fields, and geometric parameters are constrained by a closure relation:

  • The measured shift is expressed as a function of ledger vectors for fields, constants, and geometry.
  • Only combinations consistent with the QDC are allowed.
  • Specific exponent patterns can be tested against high-precision NV data.
Status and next steps

The Coherent Ledger Fields paper outlines qualitative and semi-quantitative NV-center scenarios where QDL’s ledger-coherence requirements may produce detectable shifts or patterns not captured by conventional parameterizations.

  • Prototype experiments can begin with existing NV setups, reanalyzing data in a ledger framework.
  • Dedicated experiments can vary geometry and field configurations to isolate QDL-specific signatures.

Reference: Coherent Ledger Fields – 10.5281/zenodo.17803804

Cavity length–frequency scaling

Teaching-lab and precision setups as L–F ledger probes.

Concept

Cavity resonators offer a clean environment in which length and frequency are tightly linked. In the QDL framework, cavity length \(L\) and resonant frequency \(f\) are expressed in a length–frequency basis, and their product is required to close appropriately in the ledger.

The teaching-lab cavity paper shows how an inverse-length scaling relation can be formulated directly in the 3L + 2F ledger. More advanced setups could:

  • Vary cavity geometry and materials while tracking ledger-based invariants.
  • Compare QDL-predicted scaling corrections to high-Q cavity measurements.
Status and next steps

Existing undergraduate and graduate cavity experiments can be repurposed as low-barrier tests of QDL scaling by:

  • Rewriting the lab analysis in an L–F dimensional basis.
  • Comparing standard fits to QDL-inspired ledger fits.

Reference: Teaching Dimensional Analysis with a Length–Frequency Basis – 10.5281/zenodo.17663340

Metamaterial coherence & dispersion

Engineered media as approximate QDC environments.

Concept

Metamaterials can be engineered to exhibit exotic dispersion, effective refractive indices, and tailored field configurations. QDL treats these as approximate realizations of ledger-coherent environments, in which certain combinations of effective parameters should lock together if the QDC structure is relevant.

In this view:

  • Effective permittivity, permeability, and geometric scales are treated as ledger quantities.
  • Coherence criteria derived from QDL predict which combinations are stable or resonant.
  • Departures from standard dispersion relations could indicate ledger-governed structure.
Status and next steps

The Coherent Ledger Fields paper outlines metamaterial regimes where QDL might produce distinctive signatures, especially in dispersion-collapse or critical scaling scenarios.

  • Initial work can focus on reanalyzing existing metamaterial data through QDL exponents.
  • Purpose-built structures could be designed to magnify predicted QDL effects.

Reference: Coherent Ledger Fields – 10.5281/zenodo.17803804

Collaboration & data

How experimental groups can engage with the QDL program.

For experimental groups

The QDL Physics Institute welcomes collaboration with groups in:

  • Precision torsion-balance measurements.
  • NV-center and related solid-state spin-resonance platforms.
  • High-Q cavity and resonator experiments.
  • Metamaterial design and characterization.
  • Metrology and constants-focused laboratories.

Even before dedicated experiments, many datasets can be reanalyzed in a QDL ledger framework to look for patterns or anomalies in scaling behavior.

Contact & resources

Experimentalists interested in QDL-based analyses or joint design work can contact:

Email: [email protected]

Additional materials:

All experimental proposals and predicted scalings are intended to be fully auditable: ledger tables, dimensional exponents, and key algebraic steps are being published alongside manuscripts so that external groups can independently verify or refute QDL claims using their own apparatus.