Theoretical analysis demonstrates D-brane embedding into a 64-dimensional topological manifold, indicating rigid topological invariants resolve the string theory vacuum landscape problem.
The D-brane system of string theory, as a higher-dimensional extended object, is capable of unifying gauge interactions and supplying a mechanism of gravitational localisation, yet lacks a self-referential dynamical foundation and consequently falls into the “vacuum landscape” dilemma. On the basis of the core law system of the T⁶⁴ topology of Yuanxian Theory, this paper rigorously argues that the D-brane universe is not a foundational ontology, but a projection-induced structure of the 64-dimensional compact-torus self-referential mind field Ψ=F(Ψ) at low energy scales. By constructing exact mathematical interfaces at four levels — topological geometry, gauge field theory, gravitational dynamics and physical constants — the paper proves that every mature tool of string-theoretic D-branes can be embedded losslessly into the T⁶⁴ framework, and that all adjustable free parameters (coupling constants, mass spectra, vacuum expectation values) are rigidly locked by 64-dimensional topological invariants. Consequently the “landscape” of string theory is truncated by the unique topological rigidity of T⁶⁴ into an “island,” dark-matter effects are re-interpreted as inter-brane gravitational projections, and the predicted temporal drift of the fine-structure constant supplies a decisive experimental test that distinguishes the two paradigms. --- 弦论中的D-膜体系作为高维延展客体,虽能统一规范相互作用并提供引力局域化机制,却因缺乏自指动力学根基而陷入“真空景观”困境。本文基于元宪理论 T⁶⁴ 拓扑的核心规律体系,严格论证D-膜宇宙并非基础性本体,而是64维紧致环面自指心场 Ψ=F(Ψ) 在低能标下的投影诱导结构。通过构造拓扑几何、规范场论、引力动力学及物理常数四个层次的精确数学接口,本文证明弦论D-膜的全部成熟工具均可无损嵌入 T⁶⁴ 框架,且所有可调自由参数(耦合常数、质量谱、真空期望值)均由64维拓扑不变量刚性锁定。由此,弦论的“景观”被 T⁶⁴ 的唯一拓扑刚性截断为“孤岛”,暗物质效应被重新解释为跨膜引力投影,而精细结构常数的时间漂移预言则为区分两种范式提供了关键的判决性检验。
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zhenyuan Acharya (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: