This paper is archived as a speculative research work.Paper I fixed a family-complete finite electroweak noncommutative geometry from established Entanglement–Algebraic Spacetime (EAS) structural antecedents and proved that its self-adjoint finite inner-fluctuation sector contains exactly one family-common scalar doublet Φ=n+ ( 2,+1/2). The present paper takes that finite package as frozen input and develops its classical Euclidean almost-commutative spectral dynamics without reopening any Paper-I theorem. On the local flat-space branch R=0 , with a fixed positive spectral-action convention f_0,f_2>0 , the charged-lepton hierarchy enters only through SingVal( M_ℓ) = c_ preR_e,R_ ,R_ , where c_ pre>0 is an arbitrary common finite normalization. Canonical scalar normalization removes c_ pre from the normalized scalar coefficients. With S_2= _d R_d^2, S_4= _d R_d^4, the scalar potential has = (2π^2)/(f_0)(S_4)/(S_2^2)>0, ^2= (4f_2 ^2)/(f_0)>0, and therefore a stable nonzero vacuum with a neutral representative. For g,g'>0 , the vacuum stabilizer is U(1)_ EM , yielding m_W=(gv)/(2), m_Z=(v)/(2) g^2+g'^2, m_A=0. The truncated family-complete leptonic geometry gives g^2=3g'^2 at the spectral normalization scale; no low-energy weak-angle prediction is asserted. Canonical Yukawa normalization preserves the EAS charged-lepton hierarchy while cancelling c_ pre . After one common calibration, the vacuum-evaluated physical mass matrix agrees with the EAS mass report, and the broken-phase charged sector matches the fixed family-complete QED comparison data in electromagnetic charge, the fixed left–right mass block, and the vanishing residual finite differential. All gauge fields, the scalar doublet, spectral-action coefficients, the Euclidean host, and the broken-phase QED comparison remain interface mathematics rather than primitive SF ontology. The paper does not derive neutrino masses or flavor oscillations, a standalone anomaly-free quantum electroweak theory, renormalized masses, or low-energy running couplings.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Michael E. Labhard (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: