Study derives fine-structure constant from spectral invariants of tensor networks, indicating a precise mathematical construction.
This work presents a self-contained derivation of the inverse fine-structure constant from the spectral invariants of circular tensor networks on the moduli space of Fano 3-folds. The construction proceeds through the following algebraic chain. 1. Geometric Lagrangian and Polyakov duality The starting point is the geometric Lagrangian for an oscillating circle of radius \(R\): \[Lgeo(θ) = 4R^2cos^2θ + 1/RR^2sin^2θ + 1/4√R^2 - R^2sin^2θ.\] For \(R = π\), the zero-mode reduction of the Polyakov action yields the duality: \[T R^2/2 = 4R^2 T = 8,\] where \(T\) is the string tension. The on-shell geometric action is: \[Ageo = ∫_02π Lgeo(θ)\,dθ = 4π^3 + π^2 + π.\] 2. Circular MPS and spectral duality A circular Matrix Product State (MPS) is constructed by discretizing the circle. The bond dimension is \(D = 45\), determined by the adjoint representation of \(SO(10)\): \[(adj SO(10)) = 45.\] Under spectral projection onto the top-\(D\) subspace, the dominant eigenvalue \(λₘₐₓ\) of the transfer operator satisfies the duality: \[α⁻¹ = lnλₘₐₓ - π.\] Numerically, \(lnλₘₐₓ = 140.1778962228\), yielding: \[α⁻¹ = 137.0359991678,\] which matches the CODATA 2022 central value to within \(10⁻⁸\). 3. Fano 2-22 as algebraic moduli space The Fano 3-fold 2-22 (Mori-Mukai ID-69) has Minkowski period sequence whose coefficients \(c_5, c_6, c_7\) factorize exactly as: \[c_5 = 24 × 45,_6 = (4/3 × 45) × (45 + 64),_7 = 24 × (4/3 × 45) × (45 - 10).\] These identifications yield: \(45 = (adj SO(10))\): the MPS bond dimension; \(24\): the number of transverse modes of the bosonic string; \(64 = 8^2 = T^2\): the square of the string tension; \(I_h = 4/(3π)\): the hinge invariant from the 5D Lagrangian. 4. The 5D Lagrangian and hinge invariant The 5D gauge theory has gauge group \(SO(10)\) and Lagrangian: \[L5D = -1/4g^2 Tr(FMNFMN) + 1/2 Tr(D_MΦ D^MΦ) - λ/4 ( Tr(Φ^2) - (π^4+1) )^2 + Lhinge,\] where the hinge term is: \[Lhinge = Φ^2 | e-iπ/6Ψ_d - I_h Ψ_Φ |^2, I_h = 4/3π.\] Integration over the projective phase yields a contact term with geometric invariants: \[Δ S = 2√2 - √7,δₜₕ = 1/2πln({√8}{√8 - √7}),κ_W = 24/25 · {δₜₕ}{Δ S}.\] 5. Difference operator and characteristic polynomial The difference operator \(X = A - B\) with \[A = 2√2\,(σ_z ⊗ I_2), B = √7\,(I_2 ⊗ σ_z)\] has characteristic polynomial: \[χ_X(x) = x^4 - 30x^2 + 1.\] Its root \(Δ S = 2√2 - √7\) is the entanglement deficit, measuring the gap between the Tsirelson bound \(2√2\) and the entanglement eigenvalue \(√7\) realized at the spinorial phase \(θ = π/6\). 6. Graph sequence and convergence to the continuum The same algebraic structure generates a sequence of weighted regular graphs whose adjacency matrices satisfy trace constraints. These graphs converge in cut norm to the graphon: \[W(x,y) = κ_W \, e-γ d(x,y)\] on the 3-sphere \(S^3\) of radius \(R = π\), where \[κ_W = 24/25 · {δₜₕ}{Δ S},γ = √π^4+1 · 24/25 · {δₜₕ}{Δ S}.\] The spectral gap \(Λ_1/Λ_0 = 1.997651035107\) is consistent with the isotropy of a homogeneous spatial section. 7. Numerical verification and falsifiability All results are expressed in closed algebraic form with no free parameters. A public verification suite generates 18 independent, falsifiable outputs at 50-digit precision, including: closed-form \(α⁻¹\), historical CODATA analysis, MPS spectral convergence, Monte Carlo simulation, sensitivity scans (\(τ\), \(ε\), \(D\)), PF–DS numerical and symbolic equivalence, statistical test for \(D=45\), scan of 105 Fano families, cut norm convergence, spectral gap, graphon parameters, and a minimal reproducible script. 8. Main result The numerical evaluation yields: \[α⁻¹ = 137.0359991678,\] which matches the CODATA 2022 central value \(137.035999177\) to within \(10⁻⁸\). The derivation uses no adjustable parameters: all constants are determined by the algebraic structure of the Fano 2-22 moduli space, the Polyakov string tension \(T = 8\), and the hinge invariant \(I_h = 4/(3π)\).
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Massimiliano Blandino (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: