Theoretical modeling links E8 Yang–Mills coupling to cosmological parameters, demonstrating a pathway to resolve the cosmological constant hierarchy.
We adopt Ḡ₂ = 1.9758 as a conditional working value for the E8 Yang–Mills coupling parameter, obtained from Casimir scaling (QCD analogy) with a Z2/Immirzi-type correction, g² = (4π/h∨)(1 − ln 2/h∨) = 0.4092, and propagate it to all downstream observables. This single conditional value unlocks: the vacuum energy density ρ_vac = 6.79 Λ_E8⁴ (+3.55% vs. observation), the Hubble constant H₀ = 68.6 km/s/Mpc (postdiction, +1.76%), the asymptotic expansion rate H∞ = 56.8 km/s/Mpc (prediction), and the E8 mass gap Δ = 2.64 meV via Frasca's infrared mapping (whose Clay-level existence proof remains open, as stated). The de Sitter quantities (T_dS = 1.93×10⁻³⁴ eV, S_dS = 3.2×10¹²², horizon radius 1.63×10²⁶ m) follow. The program's own dual-cone conjecture (Δ/Λ = 2.122, requiring Ḡ₂ ≥ 3.39) is honestly refuted for this value, and Frasca's ratio c = 1.886 is adopted. The cosmological-constant hierarchy 10⁻¹²¹ is exhibited as the cascade ratio to the fourth power, C_vac·(Λ_E8/M_Pl)⁴, reducing six ΛCDM inputs to two external inputs (Λ_E8, Λ_UV) plus one conditional parameter (Ḡ₂). Every quantity is classified by epistemic status; five falsifiable entries (PRED-077 to PRED-081). The single decisive arbiter is a lattice E8/G2 computation: Ḡ₂ ≥ 3.39 would reopen the cone, and any lattice value of the coupling directly tests the whole chain.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
E.U.O. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: