{
  "id": "oai:papers.qnfo.org:master-calibration-for-non-overlapping-physical-frameworks-composition-closure-a",
  "slug": "master-calibration-for-non-overlapping-physical-frameworks-composition-closure-a",
  "title": "Master Calibration for Non‑Overlapping Physical Frameworks: Composition, Closure, and the Limits of Partial Translation",
  "authors": [
    "Rowan Brad Quni-Gudzinas"
  ],
  "abstract": "Physics is fragmented by persistent bifurcations—general relativity versus quantum mechanics, continuum versus discrete descriptions, the Heisenberg cut, and the status of the observer. These schisms impose concrete costs: collider, fusion, and quantum‑hardware programmes proceed without a shared observable that can bridge the frameworks underlying their design choices. This work asks whether a master calibration—a family of partial translation maps that composes consistently across all frameworks—can exist, and what combinatorial and error‑budget burden such a calibration imposes. Counting arguments applied to a 29‑schism inventory yield 406 unordered pairwise maps and 3 654 independent composition constraints, a constraint‑to‑map ratio of exactly 9.0. A seven‑domain family admits only 21 unordered pairs, so at least eight schisms lie outside any pairwise reduction under a one‑schism‑per‑pair assumption. A three‑framework loop with edge errors 10^-3, 2×10^-3, and 5×10^-4 gives a closure‑error bound of 3.4965×10^-3. A genericity projection with independent square‑constraint success probability p=0.9 yields a master‑calibration success probability of 6.34×10^-168 and a maximal family size of n_max=7 at a 1 % success threshold. The corrected correlation analysis shows that the independent value for a seven‑framework family is 0.9³5≈0.02503, while Fréchet bounds place the joint success probability in [0,0.9]. The results separate structural schisms (no admissible translation within tolerance) from conventional ones (admissible but costly) and show that beyond small families global consistency must be enforced by construction rather than hoped for.",
  "abstract_markdown": "Physics is fragmented by persistent bifurcations—general relativity versus quantum mechanics, continuum versus discrete descriptions, the Heisenberg cut, and the status of the observer. These schisms impose concrete costs: collider, fusion, and quantum‑hardware programmes proceed without a shared observable that can bridge the frameworks underlying their design choices. This work asks whether a *master calibration*—a family of partial translation maps that composes consistently across all frameworks—can exist, and what combinatorial and error‑budget burden such a calibration imposes. Counting arguments applied to a 29‑schism inventory yield 406 unordered pairwise maps and 3 654 independent composition constraints, a constraint‑to‑map ratio of exactly 9.0. A seven‑domain family admits only 21 unordered pairs, so at least eight schisms lie outside any pairwise reduction under a one‑schism‑per‑pair assumption. A three‑framework loop with edge errors $10^{-3}$, $2\\times10^{-3}$, and $5\\times10^{-4}$ gives a closure‑error bound of $3.4965\\times10^{-3}$. A genericity projection with independent square‑constraint success probability $p=0.9$ yields a master‑calibration success probability of $6.34\\times10^{-168}$ and a maximal family size of $n_{\\max}=7$ at a 1 % success threshold. The corrected correlation analysis shows that the independent value for a seven‑framework family is $0.9^{35}\\approx0.02503$, while Fréchet bounds place the joint success probability in $[0,0.9]$. The results separate structural schisms (no admissible translation within tolerance) from conventional ones (admissible but costly) and show that beyond small families global consistency must be enforced by construction rather than hoped for.",
  "date": "2026-10-11",
  "first_published": "2026-10-11",
  "last_revised": "2026-10-24T02:21:12Z",
  "modified": "2026-10-24T02:21:12Z",
  "version": "2.6.0",
  "version_count": 8,
  "language": "en",
  "keywords": [],
  "quality_tags": [
    "High-quality scholarly research",
    "open-access scholarly work",
    "versioned research publication"
  ],
  "quality_label": "High-quality scholarly research",
  "quality_basis": "QNFO publisher classification for open-access, versioned research with a public revision history and reader correction channel; this is not a claim of independent peer review.",
  "quality_evidence_url": "https://qnfo.org/about",
  "peer_review_status": "Not independently peer-reviewed",
  "resource_type": "ScholarlyArticle",
  "doi": null,
  "doi_url": null,
  "url": "https://papers.qnfo.org/papers/master-calibration-for-non-overlapping-physical-frameworks-composition-closure-a",
  "license_url": "https://legal.qnfo.org/",
  "license_spdx": null,
  "sha256": "18d72cca7ba7021c78a2dbaf1d444c35d3b80c43bf145acbaa4a441ed4975d4c",
  "version_url": "https://papers.qnfo.org/papers/master-calibration-for-non-overlapping-physical-frameworks-composition-closure-a/v/2.6.0",
  "datacite": {
    "schemaVersion": "http://datacite.org/schema/kernel-4",
    "identifiers": [
      {
        "identifier": "https://papers.qnfo.org/papers/master-calibration-for-non-overlapping-physical-frameworks-composition-closure-a",
        "identifierType": "URL"
      }
    ],
    "creators": [
      {
        "name": "Rowan Brad Quni-Gudzinas",
        "nameType": "Personal",
        "nameIdentifiers": [
          {
            "nameIdentifier": "https://orcid.org/0009-0002-4317-5604",
            "nameIdentifierScheme": "ORCID",
            "schemeUri": "https://orcid.org"
          }
        ]
      }
    ],
    "titles": [
      {
        "title": "Master Calibration for Non‑Overlapping Physical Frameworks: Composition, Closure, and the Limits of Partial Translation"
      }
    ],
    "publisher": "QNFO",
    "publicationYear": "2026",
    "resourceType": {
      "resourceTypeGeneral": "Text",
      "resourceType": "ScholarlyArticle"
    },
    "subjects": [
      {
        "subject": "High-quality scholarly research",
        "subjectScheme": "QNFO publisher classification",
        "schemeUri": "https://qnfo.org/about"
      },
      {
        "subject": "open-access scholarly work",
        "subjectScheme": "QNFO publisher classification",
        "schemeUri": "https://qnfo.org/about"
      },
      {
        "subject": "versioned research publication",
        "subjectScheme": "QNFO publisher classification",
        "schemeUri": "https://qnfo.org/about"
      }
    ],
    "dates": [
      {
        "date": "2026-10-11",
        "dateType": "Issued"
      },
      {
        "date": "2026-10-24",
        "dateType": "Updated"
      }
    ],
    "language": "en",
    "version": "2.6.0",
    "rightsList": [
      {
        "rightsUri": "https://legal.qnfo.org/"
      }
    ],
    "descriptions": [
      {
        "description": "Physics is fragmented by persistent bifurcations—general relativity versus quantum mechanics, continuum versus discrete descriptions, the Heisenberg cut, and the status of the observer. These schisms impose concrete costs: collider, fusion, and quantum‑hardware programmes proceed without a shared observable that can bridge the frameworks underlying their design choices. This work asks whether a master calibration—a family of partial translation maps that composes consistently across all frameworks—can exist, and what combinatorial and error‑budget burden such a calibration imposes. Counting arguments applied to a 29‑schism inventory yield 406 unordered pairwise maps and 3 654 independent composition constraints, a constraint‑to‑map ratio of exactly 9.0. A seven‑domain family admits only 21 unordered pairs, so at least eight schisms lie outside any pairwise reduction under a one‑schism‑per‑pair assumption. A three‑framework loop with edge errors 10^-3, 2×10^-3, and 5×10^-4 gives a closure‑error bound of 3.4965×10^-3. A genericity projection with independent square‑constraint success probability p=0.9 yields a master‑calibration success probability of 6.34×10^-168 and a maximal family size of n_max=7 at a 1 % success threshold. The corrected correlation analysis shows that the independent value for a seven‑framework family is 0.9³5≈0.02503, while Fréchet bounds place the joint success probability in [0,0.9]. The results separate structural schisms (no admissible translation within tolerance) from conventional ones (admissible but costly) and show that beyond small families global consistency must be enforced by construction rather than hoped for.",
        "descriptionType": "Abstract"
      },
      {
        "description": "Publisher quality classification: High-quality scholarly research. QNFO publisher classification for open-access, versioned research with a public revision history and reader correction channel; this is not a claim of independent peer review.",
        "descriptionType": "Other"
      },
      {
        "description": "Peer review status: Not independently peer-reviewed",
        "descriptionType": "Other"
      }
    ],
    "formats": [
      "text/html"
    ]
  }
}