This paper treats the electron and the proton as one object — the pair — inside a single torsion-based frame: the electron as one omnipresent field whose excitations are the electrons, the proton as its wave partner, the two faces of a single entity whose native arithmetic is the zero-sum 0 = +1 + (-1). Charge is derived. The universality of the electron charge quantum is derived in one step from the one-field postulate (one field, one coupling, every excitation coupling identically), where the standard picture assigns each particle a charge and obtains universality by inspection. The exact equality |q_p| = |q_e| is derived conditionally, from pair-unity, the pair's zero-sum, and charge conservation: the proton face carries +e exactly. The derivation is falsifiable at a stated address — neutrality-of-matter experiments bound |q_p + q_e|/e at roughly 10^-21, and the derivation predicts a residue of exactly zero; any measured nonzero residue kills it. A corollary: the pair's vacuum is charge-neutral by construction, exactly, at every point. Mass is not derived. The mass ratio m_p/m_e = 1836.152673425 (CODATA) is subjected to a candidate census at production precision (relative deviation < 10^-9); the census produces zero producers — the famous near-miss 6*pi^5 = 1836.118109 dies as an exact law, short by 0.034565 (-18.82 ppm) — and the missing object is priced exactly: a scale law for the pair, since neither required length (2.832327 l_T for the proton, 5200.585 l_T for the electron, against l_T = 7.425305e-17 m) is an owned length and no owned law produces either ratio. The vacuum catastrophe that motivates the wider program is untouched — the pair's variable set shares no variable with the cut — and is stated at full size as NOT SOLVED.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
William Alexander Aldred (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: