Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Textbook quantum mechanics postulates its state space, its observables, a commutation relation, a Hamiltonian for each problem, the Born rule and a projection on measurement, and introduces spin as a separate two-component structure. Complex Mechanics (ℂM) keeps none of these as a law. It starts from one container—real time and three complex dimensions carrying the Kähler triad (g, J, ω) as one object—and a base of eight items stated once: the container with its triad; null matter; matter as sections of the square-root bundle K^(1/2) that superpose; two demands on the field, that its conservation law be that of the count (the fraction of runs that land in a region) and that its modulus stand in one relation to the count's density for every state, its phase each particle's action; and three named posits—a particle's two alignments, its moment along an axis or against it; where the runs start; and the frame in which a pair's joint outcome is resolved. Beyond the base the paper takes in what its Table 1 lists: two named constructions for pairs; one named premise, that the magnetic moment reads the angular momentum of the J-rotation, the J-action; three readings, one that an apparatus reads the visible sector only and two in the bound electron's moment; and results, statements and inputs of the framework, two of them numbers solved once on a measurement. On that footing the imaginary unit is the complex structure J, and a field's phase is the angle of its rotation, the J-angle. A superposition of null phases, the phases of free null matter, obeys i∂ψ/∂t = √(m² − ∇²) ψ, whose leading term, with the phase's rate at rest removed, is the free Schrödinger equation; a pull enters as an input. The Born rule's weight is derived: |ψ|² is the only density the paths carry. Where the runs start stays a posit, an initial condition; in the one case computed, a particle in a box, the paths carry a start off the density onto it at each cell size read, never point by point. Spin-½'s half rate is that of K^(1/2), whose sections change sign under one full turn of the J-angle; with a named construction for pairs it gives the exchange sign −1, and with the moment law's premise and the lepton's unit of J-action, g = 2. A particle's two spin states are its two alignments, and its Stern–Gerlach odds are cos²(θ_field/2) at the angle θ_field between its moment and the field. The theory is deterministic, with hidden variables: each particle's velocity is, at the leading order, the gradient of its own J-angle over m, the velocity law of de Broglie's and Bohm's theory, here one step from the base's reading of the J-angle as each particle's action. Where quantum mechanics gives the odds, the path decides which particle goes where: the particles that start in the top cos²(θ_field/2) of a Stern–Gerlach beam land in the + lobe and the rest in the − lobe, and behind a double slit the paths bend with the state and land as the fringes. The opposite-alignment pair's correlation is −cos Δ at the angle Δ between the two analyzers, every pair state's CHSH value is at most 2√2, and nothing signals. At the order computed no prediction differs from quantum mechanics, and the one place a difference could live is where the runs start. Told with these: the moment beyond g = 2 is not yet computed, and the bound electron's leading-order moment stands +2.0 of the measurement's uncertainty from hydrogen's and about 400 and 1060 of theirs from two hydrogenlike ions'. Light as a quantized field and systems of many particles, from helium to condensates, are not yet derived. A companion to the framework paper Complex Mechanics, version 4.30 (doi:10.5281/zenodo.19349816). The script qm_repro.py, posted with this record, recomputes 110 of the paper's printed values from its printed equations.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Orrick Brian (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 8 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: