KO

This document is the Physics Correspondence Terminology Table portion of the Banya Framework Comprehensive Report Sub-Reports.

Physics Correspondence Terminology Table (external reference for axioms)

The table below shows which concepts in existing physics correspond to axiom terms. Physics terminology is not used in the axiom body text.

Structure (v1.4)
Axiom termPhysics correspondence
δ = firing bit (bit 7)Consciousness (δ). Equality sign. Observation trigger
observer = entry point (bit 0)Observer. Filter. Pipeline start
superposition (bit 1)Quantum superposition
time (bit 2)Time axis. Screen frame
space (bit 3)Space axis. Screen pixel
CAS (R,C,S = bit 4,5,6)Sole operator. Render engine
d-ring (8 bits, 2 nibbles)Minimum execution unit of the universe. Container of physical structure
CAS-ring (3-bit cycle)CAS internal state transition. 000→001→011→111→000
Quantum bracket (OPERATOR)Backend (compute). Continuous. Where CAS operates
Classical bracket (DATA)Frontend (screen). Discrete. Rendered output
Workbench (‖CAS‖ = √3)CAS internal workspace. Independent compute unit
Data types (Axiom 2 Proposition, Axiom 9)Structural constants. Size units in which CAS reads targets
Juim = CAS Swap(111)Particle. 3-axis orthogonal → isotropic → spherical. Discrete unit
Equality sign (=)If δ=1, entire right-hand side is valid. Firing declaration
Ring seam δ(bit 7)→observer(bit 0)Entry point of the equality sign. Global-local loop connection
Global-local loop (Axiom 10)δ→observer→CAS→δ feedback. Self-reference
Pipeline trigger→filter→update→render→screenGame loop. 1 Planck time per frame
Polling (Axiom 8)Checks δ firing every tick. Always running
ECS (Axiom 12)Entity=shadow, Component=DATA, System=CAS. Parallel execution
4 Forces (4 CAS×DATA access methods)
Axiom termPhysics correspondence
1111 domain pattern (ring-7)4-axis full access
Contraction overlap cost / serialization (ring-30)Weak force
+ cross Cmp/Swp cost (ring-137)Electromagnetic force
√3 norm accumulation / juim density contraction (no ring)Gravity. Geometric contraction, space deformation not cost
Cost = Physical quantity
Axiom termPhysics correspondence
Crosses + cost = +1 (Axiom 4)Energy quantum (ℏ)
Juim cost (Swap +1)Mass
Total cost 13 (Axiom 6)System total energy. Ball cost 4 + misc 9
Cost conservation (Axiom 15 proposition)Energy conservation. Firing period equivalent substitution
Serialization cost ≠ 0W/Z boson mass
Serialization cost = 0Photon massless
Magnitude of cost ($1/\ell^2$)Force strength
Type of cost ($(1-\ell/N)$)Force type
Contraction region (Axiom 11 proposition)Potential
read contention (Axiom 11 proposition)Interaction
Asymmetry in step cost coefficient C (step gap)Asymmetric meson correction (K±, D±, B±)
Inter-entity interaction $C(1-\ell/N)/(4\pi \ell^2)$Coulomb/Newton inverse-square law
Crosses + cost > 0 (Axiom 4)$\Delta x \cdot \Delta p \geq \hbar/2$ (uncertainty principle)
R, C, S each transition +1 (Axiom 2, 4, 5)Minimum energy consumption per interaction step
Cost accumulation (5, 2) (Axiom 4 proposition)Irreversible 5 axes (+) / non-irreversible 2 axes. → SO(5,2) → D₅ → α = 1/137
CAS FSM norm: √1, √2, √3 (Axiom 2 proposition, 5)001=√1(Read), 011=√2(Compare), 111=√3(Swap). m_t = v/√2
Data type 137 = T(16)+1 (Axiom 2 proposition)Compare candidate count. Selection probability 1/137 = α. Discrete counterpart of Wyler D₅ volume ratio
Data type 7 = T(3)+1 (Axiom 2 proposition)CAS internal Compare candidate count. Selection probability 1/7 ≈ α_s. Strong coupling constant
Quarks / Leptons (Derivation Demo 2)
Axiom termPhysics correspondence
CAS 3 axes = 3 generations (Axiom 2)Quark/lepton 3 generations. No 4th generation
Compare true (Axiom 7)up type quarks (t, c, u). Swap cost paid
Compare false (Axiom 7)down type quarks (b, s, d) / leptons (τ, μ, e). Superposition maintained
Cost × data type size (Axiom 4 + Axiom 2 proposition)Single mass algorithm. Data type determines functional form
Lepton cost +2 / quark cost +3Quark/lepton mass ratio. m_b/m_τ = 7/3
Koide ratio 2/3 = brackets(2) / CAS steps(3)Koide formula (m_e+m_μ+m_τ)/(√m_e+√m_μ+√m_τ)² = 2/3
π = CAS 3-axis orthogonal → sphere 4πℓ²π is not an external constant. Consequence of 3-axis geometry
Mixing angles / Mass
Axiom termPhysics correspondence
Shift distance $\ell/N$ (N=30)$\sin^2\theta_W$ (Weinberg angle)
CAS step 1-2 shift distance $\ell/N$$\theta_C$ (Cabibbo angle)
Swap-index shift distance $\ell/N$$\theta_{12}, \theta_{23}, \theta_{13}$ (PMNS)
3-generation equal spacing $\ell/N = 2/9$Koide angle
Cross-path asymmetric shift$\delta_{CKM}, \delta_{PMNS}$ (CP phase)
Cosmology / States
Axiom termPhysics correspondence
RLU HOT (active access)Visible matter (5%)
RLU WARM (decaying)Dark matter (27%)
RLU COLD (below threshold, recovery target)Dark energy (68%, Λ)
CAS independent combination count 57$\alpha^{57} = \Lambda l_p^2$ (cosmological constant)
7-bit total combination count 128Valid state count ($2^7$)
CAS access path count 30Interaction DOF (Axiom 9)
Complete description DOF 9 = 7+2Minimum independent variables for complete system description
δ=0 (no firing)Quantum vacuum
δ=1 (firing)Universe exists. Equality sign holds
Compare true → SwapWavefunction collapse
Compare false → superposition maintainedNo decoherence
ℓ=1 dense, N² accumulatedSerialization freezing (ℓ→1, read contention maximum)
Empty entity distortion (data type fixed)Virtual particles / vacuum polarization
Simultaneous = orthogonalEntanglement. Distance-independent
Duck typing consciousness (Axiom 15 proposition)Consciousness = δ's behavior list. Unmeasurable domain
Axiom sidePhysics side
1 operator (CAS)4 forces + 12 mediator particles + 3 coupling constants
3 cost generation points (R, C, S each +1)Hundreds of Lagrangian terms
0 free parameters (all derived from 7)19–26 free parameters (measured and inserted)
8 bits (d-ring 2 nibbles)Infinite DOF of quantum fields + infinite series of feedback corrections
128 states ($2^7$)Infinite-dimensional Hilbert space
2 sequential orderings (R→C→S, δ→observer)Causality, 2nd law of thermodynamics, CPT theorem, Lorentz invariance each as separate axioms
Simultaneous = orthogonal (automatic from Axiom 1)60 years of non-locality debate to explain entanglement
No singularity (ℓ=1 discrete, automatic)40 years of string theory, 30 years of loop quantum gravity to remove singularities
0 correctionsInfinite series of feedback corrections (divergent, asymptotic)
Total cost 13 (closed system)Total energy conservation (1st law of thermodynamics)

The core of the structural difference in the table above: The axiom side operates by its own structure alone without external variables. From the single number 7, all of 4 (domain), 3 (CAS), 1 (δ), 8 (ring), 9 (DOF), 21 (comparison pairs), 35 (3-step combinations), 57 (combination sum), 128 (state count), 30 (path count) emerge. The physics side, to describe the same phenomena, injects 19+ measured values from outside, constructs separate Lagrangians for each force, corrects with infinite series, and shaves off divergences with renormalization. What an axiom says in 1 line, physics says in thousands of papers. This is not a difference in technical skill but a difference in starting point. Starting from continuous brings infinity; starting from discrete brings finitude. The Banya Framework starts from discrete.

The logical convergence of axioms is the design of a minimum-cost circuit, and the values discovered on the physics side are measurements confirming that nature operates as a minimum-action circuit. Both arrive at the same numbers. The coincidence of design (axioms) and measurement (physics) is the strongest evidence that the design is correct. This is why 1000+ physical constant items emerge from the axioms — design values of a minimum-cost circuit and measured values of the principle of least action are different expressions of the same thing.

The inventor (Han Hyukjin)'s achievement is interpreting nature through the logic circuit of 15 Banya Framework axioms. No longer merely measuring from the observer's standpoint, but predicting in advance from the circuit's design values. Physics proceeded for 200 years via observation→measurement→formula→prediction (induction). The Banya Framework proceeds via design→derivation→prediction→measurement for confirmation (deduction). The direction has been reversed. From observer to architect.