Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Speculative research develops the scalar-field origin of charge in EAS, indicating new structures in electromagnetism.
This paper is archived as a speculative research work. This paper develops the scalar-field origin of the finite electric-charge class in Entanglement Algebraic Spacetime (EAS) while separating charge, current, and electromagnetic-field-facing structure. Charge is not introduced as a primitive scalar value, scalar sign, current, gauge field, photon, force, or spacetime field. The paper identifies the finite charge class as the completed common-mode representation weight of a bounded handed support. Support formation is treated as a handedness-sorting process: same-handed-enough points form coherent bounded support structure, while non-support-eligible handedness structure remains exterior/dressing-facing. A coherent handed support determines a charge-class report rho_H, whose additive, cyclically invariant, completed-support-normalized compression gives Q̂ = C_Q(rho_H) in {-1, 0, +1}. This charge class is not a current and is not the electromagnetic field. The conserved-current-facing object is instead the charge-weighted Noether-facing recurrent-wave report J^Q_Ξ = Q̂ Jʷᵃᵛᵉ_Ξ, where Jʷᵃᵛᵉ_Ξ arises only in a stable recurrent pattern-wave sector with continuous report-wave phase. The electromagnetic-field-facing object is local report-frame comparison and closed-cycle holonomy in such stable recurrent-wave sectors, not handedness itself. This separation explains how electron-, muon-, and tau-like supports can share the same unit charge class while differing in mass-facing support-interior recurrence, stiffness, or scalar-amplitude structure. The resulting bridge to the EAS/NCG QED construction is rho_H -> Q̂, Q̂ JʷᵃᵛᵉΞ -> J^μ, local report-frame holonomy -> F{μν}. The result gives a scalar-field account of charge class, charge sign, charge conservation, current-facing Noether report structure, and electromagnetic-field-facing holonomy structure; it does not derive the empirical coupling e, the fine-structure constant, continuum spacetime, scattering amplitudes, or the full quantized QED path integral.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Michael Labhard (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 8 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: