Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
AF-4 read the Debye wall as a saturation count and priced its one assumed step — a linear dispersion with a single averaged sound speed — by a six-material table whose worst entry was copper at ratio 1.362. Its F3 charged the successor: recompute copper with measured dispersion input, and if the ratio moves by more than its printed distance from the measured θ_D (0.362), the averaging pricing was wrong in size. This paper runs that recompute. Branch-resolved — measured longitudinal and transverse sound speeds combined as the low-temperature wall requires, 1/v_m³ = (1/3)(1/v_l³ + 2/v_t³) with v_l = 4760, v_t = 2325 m/s — copper's wall lands at θ_D = 341.8 K against the measured 343 K: ratio 0.996, a distance of 0.004, ninety times inside the tolerance F3 set. The averaging pricing was right in size; the single mean speed was the whole error, exactly as charged. The paper then bends the dispersion on purpose — sine branches through the zone-boundary frequencies of record — and integrates the density of states: the mode count returns 3.0000 per atom, unchanged, while every filling quantity moves. Count and filling separate cleanly, in a computed integral, not a slogan. Finally the same reading is carried to optics proper: BK7's entire visible dispersion is carried by a Sellmeier sum of exactly three oscillators — a finite count of resonance addresses, declared, at 0.077, 0.141, and 10.176 μm.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
William Alexander Aldred (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 8 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: