Beyond The Clock, Within Science: A Constraint-based Epistemic framework for evaluating fundamentality claims in Physics This work introduces the Independent-Constraint Framework (ICF), a systematic methodology for classifying physical parameters based on the number of independent observational constraints that support them. A physical quantity is considered empirically robust only if constrained by at least two independent measurement procedures whose validity domains overlap non-trivially. Applying this framework reveals that several central constructs in contemporary physics, including the cosmological constant, Hubble parameter, and dark matter, currently lack the constraint structure required to justify claims of universality or fundamentality. Where such criteria are not met, the work identifies underdetermination and explores alternative interpretations compatible with existing observations. Key Contributions: Methodological: The ICF provides an epistemic classification scheme that separates empirically constrained observables from parameters lacking independent determination, applicable across cosmology, quantum gravity, and particle physics. Cosmological Constant Reframing: Demonstrates that the 120-order-of-magnitude discrepancy arises from comparing unconstrained theoretical predictions with observationally determined parameters—a category error rather than a physical problem requiring cancellation mechanisms. Hubble Tension Analysis: Identifies that neither CMB nor local measurements possess internal independent constraints on H₀, predicting that gravitational-wave standard sirens will provide the crucial independent constraint, with H₀(GW) = 70 ± 2 km/s/Mpc by 2030. Mathematical Framework: Introduces divisor-based structures as deterministic, exactly computable measures of complexity independent of temporal dynamics, providing proof-of-concept that entropy and order do not logically require time. Testable Predictions: Generates 12 falsifiable predictions across cosmology (dark energy w₀ ≈ -0.97), gravitational physics (black hole entropy corrections), and dark matter phenomenology, with observation timelines spanning 2025-2035. Status and Limitations: This framework is methodological rather than theoretical. It does not propose new fundamental laws, does not modify established dynamics (GR, QFT, ΛCDM remain valid in their domains), and explicitly acknowledges incomplete derivations where present. The work distinguishes rigorously between established claims (ICF methodology, cosmological constant reframing), testable hypotheses (H₀ predictions, dark energy variability), and speculative applications (geometric dark matter, divisor-based microstates). All major claims produce falsifiable predictions with specified timelines and success criteria. Confidence levels are calibrated and explicitly stated: high confidence (>80%) for methodological contributions, medium confidence (40-50%) for near-term cosmological predictions, low confidence (15-35%) for dark matter and black hole applications. Falsification Criteria: The framework is definitively falsified if: (1) H₀(GW) agrees exclusively with either CMB or local measurements rather than intermediate values, (2) dark energy w₀ = -1.000 ± 0.01 exactly, (3) particle dark matter detected at any sensitivity, or (4) laboratory measurement of vacuum energy density equals cosmological constant. Intended for researchers in cosmology, gravitational physics, quantum gravity, and philosophy of science. All mathematical results formalized in appendices with computational procedures specified for reproducibility. SUBJECT SECTORS; independent-constraints cosmological-constant hubble-tension gravitational-waves dark-energy epistemic-framework observational-cosmology
Nadia Hadj Sahraoui (Sat,) studied this question.