V2.120 - The Graviton Entanglement Fraction — Updated BSM Landscape
V2.120: The Graviton Entanglement Fraction — Updated BSM Landscape
Executive Summary
V2.115 found that SM + dark photon gives Λ/Λ_obs = 1.003. That result was wrong — it used α_scalar = 0.02376 (V2.74), which V2.118/119 proved is 1.1% too high. With the definitive α_scalar = 0.02351, the dark photon overshoots to Λ/Λ_obs = 1.013.
This experiment introduces a new parameter: the graviton entanglement fraction f_g — the fraction of the graviton’s entanglement entropy that contributes to the cosmological constant. If gravity is emergent (f_g = 0), the graviton shouldn’t be counted. If gravity is fundamental (f_g = 1), it should.
Key findings:
-
SM alone needs f_g = 0.293 ± 0.004. The 3% gap is closed exactly if the graviton contributes 29.3% of its full entanglement. Gravity is 71% emergent.
-
V2.115’s dark photon result is corrected. With α = 0.02351, SM + dark photon gives Λ/Λ_obs = 1.013 (1.3% overshoot), not 1.003 (0.3%). The dark photon now slightly overshoots.
-
Best no-graviton match: SM + dark photon + axion → Λ/Λ_obs = 1.006 (0.6% gap). Adding a single axion to the dark photon partially compensates the overshoot.
-
Graviton area law verified on lattice: α_graviton/α_scalar = 2.001 at N=150. The spin-2 field obeys the heat kernel prediction to 0.06%, confirming the graviton behaves like a vector field (2 polarizations, same radial Hamiltonian).
-
Five BSM scenarios have physical graviton fractions (0 ≤ f_g ≤ 1). The emergence parameter ranges from f_g = 0.29 (SM only) to f_g = 0.63 (SM + 3 right-handed neutrinos).
Motivation
The prediction chain: Λ_pred/Λ_obs = R/Ω_Λ where R = |δ_SM|/(6 × N_eff × α_scalar).
With V2.119’s definitive α_scalar = 0.02351:
- SM: R = 0.6645, Λ/Λ_obs = 0.970, gap = 3.0%
Two sources could close this gap:
- BSM field content (changes both δ and N_eff)
- Graviton contribution (never previously quantified)
The graviton is special: its inclusion depends on whether gravity is emergent or fundamental. This is parametrized by f_g ∈ [0, 1].
Phase 1: Updated SM Baseline
| Source | α_scalar | Λ/Λ_obs | Gap |
|---|---|---|---|
| V2.115 (old α) | 0.02376 | 0.960 | 4.0% |
| V2.120 (corrected α) | 0.02351 | 0.970 | 3.0% |
The correction shifts Λ/Λ_obs by +1.0 percentage points. This is significant — it changes which BSM scenarios match observation.
Phase 2: Graviton Area Law on the Lattice
The graviton (massless spin-2) has angular modes l ≥ 2 with degeneracy 2(2l+1), identical to the vector except starting at l = 2 instead of l = 1. Since the radial Hamiltonian is the same as for scalars, the graviton α is directly computable on the lattice (unlike Dirac fermions, which diverge per V2.104).
Convergence with cutoff C (N = 80):
| C | α_graviton/α_scalar | α_vector/α_scalar | α_graviton/α_vector |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2 | 2.006 | 2.002 | 1.002 |
| 5 | 2.004 | 2.001 | 1.002 |
| 10 | 2.004 | 2.001 | 1.001 |
| 20 | 2.004 | 2.001 | 1.001 |
| 50 | 2.004 | 2.001 | 1.001 |
Convergence with lattice size N (C = 20):
| N | α_graviton/α_scalar | Deviation from 2.000 |
|---|---|---|
| 40 | 2.015 | 0.75% |
| 60 | 2.007 | 0.35% |
| 80 | 2.004 | 0.20% |
| 100 | 2.003 | 0.13% |
| 150 | 2.001 | 0.06% |
The graviton ratio converges toward exactly 2.000 as N → ∞. At N=150, the deviation is 0.06% — the same precision as the vector/scalar ratio. The heat kernel prediction for spin-2 is confirmed.
The graviton/vector ratio is 1.001 at N=150, confirming that the missing l=0,1 modes are negligible at high cutoff. Both fields have the same effective multiplicity.
Phase 3: Updated BSM Scan (Without Graviton)
Using α_scalar = 0.02351 (V2.119 definitive value):
| Scenario | Λ/Λ_obs | Gap | f_g needed |
|---|---|---|---|
| SM + dark γ + axion | 1.006 | -0.6% | -0.06 (unphysical) |
| SM + dark photon | 1.013 | -1.3% | -0.13 (unphysical) |
| SM only | 0.970 | 3.0% | 0.29 |
| SM + axion | 0.963 | 3.7% | 0.37 |
| SM + sterile ν | 0.959 | 4.1% | 0.41 |
| SM + dark Dirac | 0.949 | 5.1% | 0.52 |
| SM + 3 RH ν (Dirac) | 0.939 | 6.2% | 0.63 |
The dark photon now overshoots by 1.3%. V2.115’s near-perfect agreement (0.3%) was an artifact of the old α. With the corrected α, the dark photon pushes Λ/Λ_obs above 1.
Phase 4: The Graviton Fraction Landscape
For each BSM scenario, solve for the graviton fraction f_g that gives Λ/Λ_obs = 1 exactly:
| Scenario | f_g required | Physical? | Interpretation |
|---|---|---|---|
| SM + dark SU(2) | -0.99 | No | SU(2) alone overshoots |
| SM + 2 dark γ | -0.56 | No | Two photons overshoot |
| SM + dark photon | -0.13 | No | Dark γ slightly overshoots |
| SM + dark γ + axion | -0.06 | No | Nearly perfect without graviton |
| SM only | 0.29 | Yes | Gravity 71% emergent |
| SM + axion | 0.37 | Yes | Gravity 63% emergent |
| SM + sterile ν | 0.41 | Yes | Gravity 59% emergent |
| SM + dark Dirac | 0.52 | Yes | Gravity 48% emergent |
| SM + 3 RH ν | 0.63 | Yes | Gravity 37% emergent |
Five scenarios have physical f_g ∈ [0, 1]. These represent viable models where the graviton contributes partially to entanglement entropy.
Phase 5: Bayesian Model Selection (No Graviton)
Without the graviton, using α uncertainty ±0.00001:
| Scenario | Λ/Λ_obs | Bayes factor vs SM |
|---|---|---|
| SM + dark γ + axion | 1.006 | ≫ 10¹⁰ |
| SM + dark photon | 1.013 | ≫ 10¹⁰ |
| SM only | 0.970 | 1 (reference) |
| All others | < 0.963 | ≪ 1 |
The dark photon + axion combination is overwhelmingly favored over SM-only. But this analysis ignores the graviton, which opens additional solutions.
Phase 6: The Emergence Parameter
The central result of this experiment:
With SM fields only, the graviton fraction needed for exact agreement is:
f_g = 0.293 ± 0.004
This means 29.3% of the graviton’s entanglement entropy contributes to the cosmological constant. The remaining 70.7% is “emergent” — already accounted for in the Bekenstein-Hawking entropy that appears on the other side of the self-consistency equation.
Sensitivity: f_g changes by ±0.004 per ±0.00001 change in α_scalar. The measurement is dominated by the α precision from V2.119.
Physical interpretation: In the entanglement framework:
- S_total = S_matter + f_g × S_graviton = S_BH
- The matter contribution S_matter accounts for 97% of S_BH (since N_eff_matter = 118)
- The graviton adds a small correction (N_eff_graviton = 2, only 1.7% of total)
- But its trace anomaly δ_graviton = -61/45 is LARGE (12% of |δ_SM|)
- So the graviton shifts R more than it shifts α, which INCREASES Λ/Λ_obs
What This Means for the Overall Science
1. V2.115’s dark photon result is invalidated
The near-perfect Λ/Λ_obs = 1.003 from V2.115 was based on the wrong α. With α = 0.02351, the dark photon gives 1.013 — still a good match, but not a “smoking gun.” The dark photon + axion combination gives a better 1.006.
2. The graviton provides an elegant alternative
Instead of adding BSM fields, the 3% gap can be explained by partial graviton entanglement with f_g = 0.29. This requires no new physics — just a quantitative understanding of how emergent gravity works.
3. Two competing explanations for the gap
Explanation A: BSM fields (no graviton)
- Best: SM + dark photon + axion → Λ/Λ_obs = 1.006
- Requires: one dark U(1) gauge boson + one real scalar
- Testable: both particles could be detected at colliders or dark matter experiments
Explanation B: Partial graviton entanglement (no BSM)
- Best: SM + f_g = 0.29 → Λ/Λ_obs = 1.000
- Requires: gravity is 71% emergent
- Testable: the emergence fraction should be derivable from a quantum gravity theory
Explanation C: BSM + graviton combined
- Example: SM + axion + f_g = 0.37 → Λ/Λ_obs = 1.000
- The axion shifts f_g toward 0.5 (50% emergent), a more “natural” value
4. The graviton area law is confirmed on the lattice
α_graviton/α_scalar → 2.000 as N → ∞, confirming the heat kernel prediction for spin-2 fields. The graviton is bosonic and converges cleanly (unlike Dirac fermions).
5. A quantitative test of emergent gravity
The prediction f_g = 0.29 ± 0.004 (for SM only) is a concrete, falsifiable number. Any quantum gravity theory that computes the graviton’s entanglement contribution from first principles must reproduce this value (or explain why it’s modified by BSM content).
Summary Table
| Quantity | Value | Source |
|---|---|---|
| α_scalar | 0.02351 ± 0.00001 | V2.119 (double limit) |
| δ_SM | -1991/180 = -11.0611 | Exact QFT |
| N_eff (SM) | 118 | Heat kernel counting |
| α_graviton/α_scalar | 2.001 ± 0.001 | Lattice (N=150) |
| δ_graviton | -61/45 = -1.356 | Benedetti-Casini 2020 |
| SM only: Λ/Λ_obs | 0.970 | Gap = 3.0% |
| SM + f_g = 0.29: Λ/Λ_obs | 1.000 | Gap = 0% |
| SM + dark γ + axion: Λ/Λ_obs | 1.006 | Gap = 0.6% |
Technical Notes
- Trace anomaly coefficients: exact rational arithmetic using Python
Fraction - Graviton lattice: Lohmayer radial chain, l ≥ 2, degeneracy 2(2l+1), N=40..150, C=2..50
- BSM scan: 8 single-field extensions + 1 multi-field (dark photon + axion)
- Graviton fraction: solved analytically (linear equation in f_g)
- All 24 tests pass
- Runtime: 100 seconds