We specify a background-independent microscopic theory for an entanglement tapestry: an infinite pre-geometric graph of unlabeled nodes connected by entanglement threads. Nodes carry no intrinsic properties. The physically meaningful degrees of freedom reside on the threads. Each thread is taken to be a qubit. A three-term many-body Hamiltonian — a valence potential, a local swapping term, and a combinatorial frustration term — generates the dynamics. The valence potential favors a preferred coordination {v}. The integer value of {v} is not derived here; it remains a free parameter. When a concrete continuum expression is required we use the illustrative value {v}=4.The new content is not a new gravitational action. It is an explicit state space, a dynamical law, and a staged continuum pathway from that Hamiltonian to an effective metric. An Einstein-like equation is obtained by varying a covariant continuum action in which the Einstein–Hilbert term is introduced as an effective gravitational sector, not derived from the graph measure. A tensor-network blocking on a two-dimensional square lattice is used only as a proof of principle that the leading linear coefficient in the beta function is extractable once a blocking rule is fixed. No thermodynamically controlled numerical value of that coefficient is reported. High-density patterns admit an entanglement bound of Ryu–Takayanagi type from thread counting across relational cuts; saturation is not claimed for generic states. The continuum description is of closed-time-path type, which avoids a local wrong-sign kinetic term for a single propagating field. A complete stability analysis of the model’s continuum kernels is left open.This paper does not derive a preferred integer {v}, an Einstein–Hilbert term from the microscopic measure, or a reduced vault–forge master equation. Those problems are stated where they arise and are left open.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
A. Scott Howe (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: