Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Sequential Time Theory audits the Standard Model, establishing a metrological basis for the Higgs mechanism, showing implications for mass definitions.
Sequential Time Theory (STT) provides a metrological foundation for physics, defining time through operational procedures rather than as a geometric coordinate. STT CR (Metrological Completion of Relativity) established a formal framework: Physics ≡ (STT-Core → Bridge → L1) → Θsys Physical Systems, where L1 is the formal language of dynamics, L2 (STT-Core) is the operational definition of time, and Θsys is the mapping rule to specific physical systems. This paper applies this framework to audit the Standard Model (ΘSM), focusing on the Higgs mechanism. We propose that mass is not a primitive quantity but is defined through the time unit process: m ≡ h/(c² · Δ Qᵤₙᵢₜ). From Bridge axiom B4 (local calibration consistency), we derive that mass must be determined by a spatially uniform Lorentz-scalar quantity. From metrological constraints on Δ Qᵤₙᵢₜ—positivity (C1), finiteness (C2), and statistical reproducibility (C3)—together with an explicit minimality assumption (Θₘᵢₙᵢₘₐₗ), we derive the form of the Higgs potential V(φ) = -μ²|φ|² + λ|φ|⁴, where the derivation is conditional on the stated assumptions. We show that, for UV-complete fundamental descriptions, renormalizability is a metrological necessity: otherwise the operational distribution of clock-ticks becomes resolution-dependent in a way that cannot be removed by finitely many calibrations (violating C3 and B4). Effective-field descriptions can still satisfy C3 within a finite resolution window. Finally, we present a testable prediction distinguishing STT from standard quantum mechanics: intrinsic clock fluctuations scale as σQ ∝ 1/m², predicting σQ⁽ᵉ⁾/σQ(μ) ≈ mμ/mₑ ≈ 2.07 × 10² for electrons versus muons.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Teruhito Kojima (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 8 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: