Corpus
Boundary Coherence Theory Corpus
The governed source corpus: ontology, projection framework, domain unfoldings, and engineering realizations.
Open DOIWelcome to BCT
Boundary Coherence Theory
Boundary Coherence Theory is a governed research corpus built around one geometric reversal: before forces, fields, particles, wavefunctions, or spacetime geometry, ask what configurations are permitted to exist at all.
The boundary is the physically realised admissibility interface between two structural sectors: a two-dimensional tangential sector, T, that routes, circulates, and carries winding; and a three-dimensional volumetric sector, V, that stores, converts, and carries curvature participation. At the realised boundary, T contributes both tangential degrees of freedom, while V contributes one normal participation channel, giving the local 2T+1V geometry.
From three ontological commitments — 2T+1V dimensional asymmetry, finite healing length, and single-valued continuation — the paper trilogy develops electromagnetism, localized matter, and gravity as three entry points into one boundary architecture.
Corpus position
BCT does not stand beside existing physics as a rival. It steps underneath it.
Conventional physics remains valid where its projections work. BCT changes what those projections are taken to mean. Forces, fields, wavefunctions, spacetime geometry, thermodynamics, and gravity are not treated as separate foundations; they are recovered or reinterpreted as compressed readings of a deeper boundary architecture.
Within its declared status levels, the BCT programme recovers or structurally re-reads major parts of existing physics: Maxwell structure and charge quantization from boundary-mode geometry; Lorentz-force form and special-relativistic kinematics from projection of boundary reconfiguration; quantum formalism as admissibility bookkeeping rather than primitive probability; thermodynamic directionality from irreversible throughput; compact-regime Newtonian and weak-field GR behaviour as projection-level gravity; and galaxy-scale flat rotation / BTFR behaviour from extended-regime throughput geometry.
The source structure is admissibility-governed: a boundary between routing and storage, evolving under irreversible throughput and constrained by what configurations can continue to exist.
Published releases
There are currently three document sets.
The corpus is the authoritative source for the theory. The papers are narrative unfoldings derived from the corpus ontology, not independent alternative formulations.
Papers 1–3
Foundational Trilogy
The connected physics sequence: electromagnetism, localized matter, and gravity from one underlying boundary ontology.
Open DOIPapers 4–6
Second Trilogy
Extensions into engineering failure, biology, and the status of number as projection-level invariant geometry.
Open DOICorpus
Markdown-first, status-tagged, and strictly layered.
The corpus is distributed primarily as markdown because markdown preserves structure, headings, equations, status tags, and cross-file hierarchy in a form that high-capability language models can ingest and reason over more reliably than rendered document formats.
| Volume | Role | Authority |
|---|---|---|
| 00_xx | Governance, glossary, navigation, corpus methodology, and status grammar. | Governs the corpus. |
| 01_xx | Core ontology: primitives, admissibility rules, dynamics, and structural no-go theorems. | Ontology flows outward only. |
| 02_xx | Projection framework: how BCT maps onto conventional physics languages. | Projection cannot modify ontology. |
| 03_xx | Domain unfoldings: astrophysics, geophysics, chemistry, metabolism, and biology. | Receives from ontology. |
| 04_xx | Engineering realizations, proofs-of-principle, and applied demonstrations. | Engineering success does not validate or alter ontology. |
Status discipline
Every important claim carries a status.
Status tags distinguish ontology, locked structural consequences, projection-level recoveries, empirical interfaces, engineering realizations, interpretive commentary, and kernel-open work. This prevents projection, empirical, or engineering material from being mistaken for ontology.
Locked
Ontology and consequences
Foundational primitives, derived structural consequences, and no-go prohibitions.
[ONT][SC][NG][DR]
Projection
Comparison and observables
Bookkeeping language, empirical interfaces, validation procedures, and falsifier conditions.
[PL][EI][IC]
Downstream
Engineering and open kernels
Applied demonstrations and structurally framed areas that remain incomplete or pending closure.
[ER][KO]
Papers 1–3 trilogy
Three connected papers. One boundary architecture.
The trilogy builds progressively from a single underlying ontology. Paper 1 establishes electromagnetism as admissible local mode structure of a 2T+1V boundary. Paper 2 develops localized matter as stable boundary-vortex topology. Paper 3 derives gravity as the mandatory global throughput response to cumulative non-closure under irreversibility. The full papers are accompanied by Python supplement files for mechanical algebraic and numerical verification, together with trilogy interlock checks that help keep the cross-paper dependencies anchored.
Paper 1
What Is Electromagnetism?
Boundary-mode geometry into charge, Maxwell structure, gauge structure, and light — not as independent fields, but as projection grammar of admissible T/V structure.
Paper 2
What Is a Particle?
Curvature-storage geometry into localized matter: boundary vortices, mass, confinement, generations, and matter stability from admissibility.
Paper 3
What Is Gravity?
Global throughput geometry into gravity: the mandatory volumetric response to cumulative non-closure, not an independent force or field.
Papers 4–6
Beyond foundational physics.
The second trilogy extends the same admissibility architecture into engineering, biology, and mathematics: failure as irreversible admissibility loss, life as persistent closure organization under throughput constraints, and number as projection-level invariant geometry rather than independent ontology.
How to start
Two practical ways to engage with BCT.
Choose the route that fits how you work. Both routes should keep the corpus hierarchy intact: the corpus is authoritative, and the papers are narrative unfoldings of that ontology.