This record presents a prospective Timeless Quanta (TQ) prediction for dijet momentum imbalance in sPHENIX oxygen–oxygen (O+O) collisions at (√{sNN}=200) GeV. The prediction targets the dijet momentum-balance observable (x_J=pT,2/pT,1) and is constructed from the previously locked TQ geometry (r_c=0.447) fm, (σ=0.100) fm, and (L=1.430) fm. The associated geometric energy scale is (E_0= c/r_c0.441) GeV. A jet traversing the modeled O+O participant geometry accumulates a normalized TQ path exposure. The prospective jet-sector constitutive law maps that exposure to an additive energy shift, (Δ E_i=E_0N_iᵖᵃᵗʰ). The resulting transformation is then applied to measured p+p dijet kinematics as an experimental boundary condition. The calculation introduces no O+O dijet calibration, Au+Au normalization, fitted attenuation parameter, hydrodynamic response, transport coefficient, or conventional parton-energy-loss kernel. The participant geometry, numerical sampling prescription, random seeds, path-integration procedure, and event-level neutral trajectory assignment are stated explicitly for reproducibility. The record includes both fixed-kinematics benchmarks and a conditional distribution-level transformation based on a digitized sPHENIX p+p (x_J) reference. It also distinguishes these benchmarks from the complete migration-aware prediction, which requires a sufficiently broad joint p+p parent distribution to account for jets migrating into and out of the final experimental momentum window. As of 1 October 2026, sPHENIX had publicly reported inclusive O+O jet (RAA) and (RCP) results but no public O+O dijet (x_J) measurement. The TQ geometry, source weighting, path-exposure definition, energy-transfer law, and neutral event-level transformation recorded here are therefore prospective with respect to that observable and are not to be altered in response to any later O+O dijet result.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Johnny Rouse (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: