Constraints and a Test Protocol for Toroidal Electron Hypotheses

A toroidal interpretation of the electron requires a field theory, a quantum sector and a calculated electromagnetic response. This note separates those requirements and applies conditional compatibility checks using established Hopf-soliton and compositeness results. A quadratic-plus-quartic static energy provides a finite dilation scale but predicts neither the electron mass nor its frequency. If its inertial size is identified with an illustrative electromagnetic radius of 2.8 × 10⁻¹⁹ m and its static energy with the electron rest energy, the usual rigid-rotor correction exceeds that energy by about 7 × 10¹¹ for a unit shape factor, invalidating this semiclassical identification. The standard Lorentz completion with finite shape factors of order one has a breathing scale about 7 × 10⁵ times the rest zitterbewegung frequency; this is a conditional scale estimate, not a general exclusion of protected modes. These compactness estimates share one small parameter and are not independent evidence. A separate low-charge generation mass ansatz also fails. Magnetic-moment and excitation constraints require calculated currents, symmetries and transition couplings. The ratio of fixed-momentum Dirac interference to a transported proper-clock frequency is gamma squared, about 25,000 at the historical silicon channeling benchmark. A resonance centre or material ratio alone does not identify either ontology. The remaining programme is to calculate charge, inertia and structure form factors in one dynamical model, then freeze a distinguishing detector-level prediction. No new experimental evidence, electron solution or numerical soliton spectrum is reported. The contribution is a constraints-and-protocol note with conditional failures and unresolved calculations kept separate.