>[!warning] >This content has not been peer reviewed. # Relational Substrate Theory (RST) ## From Informational Ontology to Unified Physics *Formerly: RAWT (Relational Aether-Workload Theory); earlier URRT.* **Axiomatic foundation:** Builds on [[Relational Resolution Theory (RRT)]] (RRT) — the meta-ontological axioms A1–A5 and the Relational Landauer Principle. RST applies these to the physical universe. **Status:** Relational Unification Programme. **Logically Rigorous Baseline 1.0 / 1.7:** [[RST Baseline 1.0]] — Axiomatic, Derived, and Programmatic. Charter: [[RST Charter (Scientific Status)]]. **Canonical paper (citation):** [Zenodo — From Relational Resolution to Unified Physics](https://zenodo.org/records/18928300). **Gravity Sector (RST 1.6 / RAWT 1.6):** Main Equation, $a_0$, $n_0$, and disformal lensing **derived** (Baseline 1.7); SPARC calibration **empirical** ($\Upsilon = 0.49$, $n_0 = 1.25$, 86% fits). Zero free parameters in gravity. GW, PPN, BBN satisfied. **Four-Force Unification:** Geometric identity proven; EM predictive; Strong/Weak derived (Depth, Refresh Identity). Gauge groups from graph hierarchy ([[Graph Size Hierarchy (RST)]]). $G$, $\Lambda_\text{QCD}$, $v_\text{EW}$/ $M_W$, $E_0$, $\kappa$ are **Substrate Eigenvalues** ([[Substrate Eigenvalues]]). Physics is round. > [!tip] **Start here:** The entire theory reduces to one equation and one triangle. > - **The Law:** $I = \Omega \cdot \mu$ — see [[Resource Allocation Equation]] > - **The Geometry:** $W^n = \Omega^n + N^n$ — see [[Resource Triangle]] > - **The Forces:** [[Source Projection]] (EM), [[Noise Projection]] (Gravity), [[Relational Friction]] (Strong), [[Refresh Burden]] (Weak) > - **The Proof:** See [[RST Super-Relational Mapping]] > - **Verifiable:** [[Super-Relational Mapping Verification]]; calculation: [[Super-Relational Mapping - Code]]; results: [[about systems/expanded theory/python calculations results/README|python calculations results]] > - **Structural foundations:** [[Structural Foundations]] — resistance, fidelity, walk dimension, projection, graph attractor > - **Empirical:** [[SPARC Evaluation Verification]] — 171 galaxies, zero dark matter > - **[[Graph Size Hierarchy (RST)]]** — gauge groups from $K_2$, $K_3$; forces → matter → cosmology from graph size $N$ ### Concept Map | Symbol | Concept | Note | |:---|:---|:---| | $I$ | The request / source | [[Signal]] | | $N$ | The environmental noise | [[Noise Floor]] | | $\Omega$ | The actual output | [[Workload]] | | $W$ | The total resource envelope | [[Total Budget]] | | $\mu$ | Rendering quality | [[Fidelity]] | | $\eta$ | Signal vs. noise | [[Signal-to-Noise Ratio]] | | $n$ | How sharp the transition is | [[Transition Sharpness]] | | $W^n = \Omega^n + N^n$ | The geometric identity | [[Resource Triangle]] | | $I = \Omega \cdot \mu$ | The main equation | [[Resource Allocation Equation]] | **Concrete properties of the substrate:** For a single overview of all the concrete properties we know (cost, capacity, resolution, geometry, saturation, dynamics, protection) — with values, bounds, and links to the knowledge notes that establish them — see **[[Concrete properties of the substrate]]**. --- ## Part I: The Relational Foundation (RRT) ### I.1 Axioms Reality is modeled as resource-constrained signal maintenance on an active substrate. | Axiom | Name | Definition | | :---- | :-------------------------------- | :-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | | A1 | **[[Format]]** ($f$) | The independent, dynamic physical substrate. It determines the local noise level ($T$) and refresh interval ($\tau$). Gravity is a property of the Format: it curves the substrate so that $\tau$ differs across positions. | | A2 | **[[Information]]** ($\sigma$) | An arbitrary point of observation defined by the observer. Resolution $\sigma = -\sum p_j \log_2 p_j$ is the effective bit-count required to maintain those distinctions against thermal noise. | | A3 | **[[Translation]]** ($\to$) | The irreversible mechanism of change. Every change is an [[Event]] that costs energy ($k_B T \ln 2$ per bit). Identity is a dissipative process — maintaining a state requires active error correction. | | A4 | **[[Proper Time]]** ($\tau$) | The local refresh interval of any [[System]]'s [[Relating\|Relations]]. Time is not a background; it is the duration between discrete translations. | | A5 | **[[Relational Distance]]** ($d$) | The number of [[Translation]] steps required for one [[System]] to [[Relating]] to another. Each step costs [[Energy]]. A relation across $d$ steps costs $d$ times what a local relation costs. | ### I.2 The Relational Landauer Principle Persistence in a thermal environment is an active [[Energy]] expenditure. The minimum power required to maintain a [[System]]'s [[Information|resolution]] against the noise of the substrate is: $\Phi_{\min} = k_B \ln 2 \sum_{i=1}^{n} \frac{d_i \cdot \sigma_i \cdot T_i}{\tau_i}$ **The [[Energy Floor|Landauer Floor]]:** No physical, biological, or technological [[System]] can persist below its calculated $\Phi_{\min}$. The ratio $K_R = \Phi_{\text{measured}}/\Phi_{\min} \geq 1$ is a universal boundary. ### I.3 Inherent Constraints These are the inescapable boundaries of the [[Format]]. See [[Inherent Constraints]]. - **Irreversibility:** Every [[Translation]] is a one-way operation. - **Energy Tax:** Every [[Event]] requires [[Energy]]. Nothing changes for free. - **Causality:** [[Information]] cannot skip steps in the [[Format]]. - **Entropy:** Every [[Translation]] produces entropy. Dissipated [[Energy]] cannot be recovered. - **Locality:** [[Proper Time]] and temperature are local. No two [[System|Systems]] share an identical bill. - **Relational Friction:** Connecting to distant [[Information]] increases cost with the number of [[Translation]] steps. ### I.4 Inherent Principles of Continued Existence The patterns that emerge when [[System|Systems]] persist under the [[Inherent Constraints]]. See [[Inherent Principles of Continued Existence]]. 1. **Everything Changes.** To [[Existence|exist]] is to continuously maintain yourself. Even "staying the same" is work. 2. **Change is Gradual.** Every change builds on the last, one step at a time. 3. **Everything Builds on What Came Before.** Identity is continuity, not sameness. 4. **Reality Has a Reach.** You can only work with what you can perceive and process. 5. **Every Path is Unique.** No moment is repeated. Difference is inevitable. 6. **Existing Has a Cost.** The more you maintain, the higher the price. Letting go of detail is how things endure. ### I.5 Zoom Logic [[Information|Resolution]] carries a thermodynamic cost. [[Zoom Logic|Coarse-graining]] (reducing $\sigma$ or reducing $d$) lowers $\Phi_{\min}$, allowing a [[System]] to persist on a smaller budget. This is not approximation — it is a survival strategy that the substrate itself employs. --- ## Part II: The Bridge — From RRT to Physics (RST) ### II.1 The Core Identification RRT describes any [[System]] maintaining [[Information]] against noise. RST applies this to the physical universe by identifying: | RRT Concept | Physical Identification | | :------------------------------------- | :---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | | [[Format]] ($f$) | Spacetime (the metric $g_{\mu\nu}$) plus the substrate rest frame (aether field $A^\mu$) | | [[Noise Floor\|Noise]] ($T$) | The local expansion scalar $\theta = \nabla_\mu A^\mu$; in FLRW cosmology, $\theta = 3H(t)$ | | [[Information\|Resolution]] ($\sigma$) | The distinctions maintained by the gravitational field (mass distributions, orbital structures) | | [[Energy Floor]] ($\Phi_{\min}$) | The Maintenance Workload required to sustain gravitational structure against expansion noise | ### II.2 The Substrate: Constraints and Measurements The substrate ([[Format]]) has **structural constraints** — axiomatic properties that define its finite character. What we call "fundamental constants" are the **locally measured values** of these constraints, expressed in human-chosen units. Only **dimensionless ratios** between these values are physically meaningful and measurable. #### The Axiomatic Constraints | Constraint | Meaning | Consequence if Absent | | :-------------------------------------- | :------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | :---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | | A maximum propagation speed exists | Information transfer is finite; causality holds | No causal structure; substrate has infinite bandwidth; workload framework collapses | | A minimum distinguishable action exists | Resolution is finite; the substrate cannot render arbitrarily fine distinctions | Infinite resolution; no pixelation; no quantum behavior; no maintenance cost | | A minimum energy cost per bit exists | Persistence requires expenditure; the Landauer Floor is real | Free information maintenance; no thermodynamic arrow; no theory | These constraints are what makes the substrate a **finite-resource processor**. They are not "constants" — they are the [[Format]]'s structural identity. Without any one of them, the entire workload framework (and physics) ceases to function. #### The Measured Values | Symbol | What It Is | Status | |:---|:---|:---| | $c$ | The locally measured value of the maximum propagation speed | Not independently measurable — only ratios like $v/c$ are physical | | $\hbar$ | The locally measured value of the minimum action | Not independently measurable — only ratios like $\alpha$ are physical | | $k_B$ | The conversion factor between bits and thermodynamic energy | Definitional — a unit conversion, not a physical parameter | | $G$ | The throttling rate ($\Omega \leftrightarrow \tau$) | **Derived** — Substrate Eigenvalue; conductivity of the relational network. [[Substrate Eigenvalues]]. | | $\theta$ | The local expansion scalar ($= 3H$ in FLRW) | Dynamic — the noise floor that drives all relational corrections | #### The Physically Meaningful Quantities What can actually vary — and what RST predicts does vary — are **dimensionless ratios**: | Ratio | Definition | RST Status | |:---|:---|:---| | $g/a_0$ | Local acceleration / MOND threshold | **Dynamic** — $a_0 \propto H(z)$; this is the core prediction | | $\alpha$ | $e^2/(4\pi\varepsilon_0\hbar c)$ | **Derived** — $E_0 = a_0 \cdot m_e/e$; Gate 3 drift $\kappa = \partial\ln(V_{L^n})/\partial\ln(H)$. [[Substrate Eigenvalues]], [[RST Four-Force Bridge]]. | | $\alpha_G$ | $Gm_p^2/(\hbar c)$ | **Derived** — $G$ is Substrate Eigenvalue (throttling rate); hierarchy = topological volume ratios. [[Substrate Eigenvalues]]. | | $m_p/m_e$ | Proton-to-electron mass ratio | **Derived** — topology of scale: 3D volumetric vs 1D phase workload (geometric degree). [[Substrate Eigenvalues]], [[RST Main Identity - Code]]. | ### II.3 The Universal Interpolation Function The single mathematical object governing the transition between high-SNR (classical) and low-SNR (throttled) regimes: $\mu(\eta,\, n) = \frac{\eta}{(1 + \eta^n)^{1/n}}$ **Derivation:** $\mu$ and the Resource Triangle $W^n = \Omega^n + N^n$ follow from RRT axioms (budget exhaustion, Landauer limits, homogeneity, symmetry). See [[Fidelity Derivation]]. - **High SNR ($\eta \gg 1$):** $\mu \to 1$. Full signal fidelity. Newtonian/classical behavior. - **Low SNR ($\eta \lesssim 1$):** $\mu \to \eta$. The substrate throttles or buffers the signal. The transition sharpness $n$ is itself dynamic, with a baseline $n_0 \approx 1.24$ derived from the Pure Axiom Substrate; SPARC confirms $1.25 \pm 0.05$ (see Part VIII): $n(\theta) = n_0 + \ln\frac{\theta}{\theta_0}, \quad n_0 = 1.25$ This function has a Lagrangian origin through the AQUAL potential: $\mathcal{F}(y,\, n) = \int_0^y \left(\frac{s^{n/2}}{1 + s^{n/2}}\right)^{1/n} ds$ which recovers $\mu$ via $\mu(x) = \mathcal{F}'(x^2)$. --- ## Part III: The Gravity Sector — RST 1.6 ### III.1 The Main Action RST 1.6 is a covariant Einstein-Aether K-essence field theory with conformal matter coupling. The complete action is: $S = \int d^4x \sqrt{-g} \left[ \frac{R}{16\pi G} - \frac{M^2}{2}\mathcal{K}(A,\nabla A) - \frac{a_0(\theta)^2}{8\pi G}\mathcal{F}(y,\,n) - \varepsilon_{\min} + \lambda(A^\mu A_\mu + 1) \right] + S_m[\tilde{g}_{\mu\nu},\,\psi_m]$ where the **physical metric** (the metric matter couples to) is conformally related to the substrate metric through the workload field: $\tilde{g}_{\mu\nu} = e^{2q}\,g_{\mu\nu}$ This conformal coupling (imported from Bekenstein's Phase Coupling Gravity, 1988) is structurally required: without it, the workload field equation has no baryonic source term. With it, varying the action with respect to $q$ produces $\nabla \cdot [\mu\,\nabla q] = 4\pi G \rho_b$ in the weak-field limit, which is the MOND field equation that governs galactic dynamics. See [[RST Matter Coupling (PCG)]] for the full derivation. The $R/(16\pi G)$ term is not merely postulated. Jacobson (1995) proved that the Einstein field equation emerges as an equation of state from the thermodynamics of local Rindler horizons — which is precisely the substrate's Landauer floor (Axiom A3) applied to spacetime geometry. See [[RST Theoretical Landscape#B1 Jacobson's Thermodynamic Gravity 1995|Theoretical Landscape, B1]]. The symbols $c$, $\hbar$, $G$ appear as parameters throughout. Per Section II.2, these represent locally measured values of structural constraints. The field equations hold regardless of whether these values are universal or local, because the equations are written in terms of the symbols, not their numerical values. | Term | Role | Dimensions | |:---|:---|:---| | $R/(16\pi G)$ | Einstein-Hilbert — standard spacetime curvature (emergent via Jacobson) | $[ML^{-1}T^{-2}]$ | | $M^2\mathcal{K}/2$ | Einstein-Aether kinetic energy — substrate rest frame dynamics | $[ML^{-1}T^{-2}]$ | | $a_0(\theta)^2\mathcal{F}/(8\pi G)$ | AQUAL K-essence potential — the dynamic MOND workload | $[ML^{-1}T^{-2}]$ | | $\varepsilon_{\min}$ | Static substrate refresh cost — functions as cosmological constant $\Lambda$ | $[ML^{-1}T^{-2}]$ | | $\lambda(A^\mu A_\mu + 1)$ | Lagrange multiplier — enforces unit-timelike aether constraint | — | | $S_m[\tilde{g}]$ | Matter action, coupled to physical metric $\tilde{g}_{\mu\nu} = e^{2q}g_{\mu\nu}$ | — | ### III.2 Key Definitions - **$a_0(\theta) = c\theta/(6\pi)$:** The dynamic acceleration threshold. In FLRW cosmology the expansion scalar is $\theta = \nabla_\mu u^\mu = 3\dot{a}/a = 3H$ (for the unit comoving 4-velocity $u^\mu$); hence $\theta = 3H$ and $a_0 = cH/(2\pi)$. Standard result; see e.g. Poisson & Will (2014), *Gravity*, or any FLRW treatment. - **$y = X_q / a_0(\theta)^2$:** Dimensionless kinetic variable of the workload scalar field $q$, where $X_q = g^{\mu\nu}\partial_\mu q\,\partial_\nu q$. - **$\varepsilon_{\min}$:** A constant energy density — the irreducible cost of substrate maintenance. Free parameter fitted to the observed $\Lambda$. - **$\mathcal{K}(A, \nabla A)$:** Standard Einstein-Aether kinetic terms with coupling constants $c_1, c_2, c_3, c_4$. - **$\tilde{g}_{\mu\nu} = e^{2q}g_{\mu\nu}$:** The physical metric. Matter experiences the substrate geometry as modified by the workload field. ### III.3 Aether Sector Constraints The coupling constants $c_1, c_2, c_3, c_4$ are constrained by GW170817, Solar System PPN bounds, and Big Bang nucleosynthesis to a **one-parameter family** (see [[RST PPN Constraints]] for the full derivation): $c_2 = c_3 = c_4 = -c_1, \quad 0 < c_1 \lesssim 0.03$ This satisfies: gravitational wave speed $c_\text{GW} = c$ (via $c_3 = -c_1$), Eddington parameter $\gamma = 1$ (via $c_4 = -c_1$), zero preferred-frame effects $\alpha_1 = \alpha_2 = 0$ (via $c_2 = -c_1$), and BBN bounds. ### III.4 Horndeski Classification The workload sector maps to Horndeski gravity as pure K-essence: $G_2 = -a_0^2\mathcal{F}/(8\pi G) - \varepsilon_\text{min}$, $G_3 = G_5 = 0$, $G_4 = 1/(16\pi G) =$ const. This is the simplest surviving Horndeski class after GW170817, with $G_{4,X} = 0$ and $G_5 = 0$ trivially satisfied. See [[RST Horndeski Mapping]] for the full mapping and constraint analysis. --- ## Part IV: Cosmological Background ### IV.1 The Friedmann Equation On a homogeneous FLRW background, the workload field $q$ is spatially homogeneous, so $X_q$ has no spatial gradient contribution. The MOND potential $\mathcal{F}(0, n) = 0$ vanishes identically. The modified Friedmann equation reduces to: $H^2 = \frac{8\pi G}{3c^2}\left(\varepsilon_b + \varepsilon_r + \varepsilon_A + \varepsilon_{\min}\right)$ **Result:** RST recovers $\Lambda$CDM-like expansion at the background level. SNe Ia, BAO, and CMB distance constraints are satisfied at zeroth order. The MOND sector is invisible to background cosmology — it activates only where spatial gradients exist (galaxies, clusters, local structures). ### IV.2 Perturbative Stability The workload's back-reaction on the expansion is controlled by the factor $\mathcal{F}/(12\pi^2)$. Since $12\pi^2 \approx 118$ and $\mathcal{F}$ is of order unity in the relevant regime, this correction is perturbatively small ($\sim 1\%$). The feedback loop (where $H$ drives $a_0$, which could in principle affect $H$) does not destabilize the expansion. --- ## Part V: The Local Field Equation — Galaxy Kinematics ### V.1 The Equation In the quasi-static, weak-field, spherically symmetric limit around a baryonic mass distribution, the workload field equation becomes: $\mu\!\left(\frac{q'}{a_0(\theta)},\; n(\theta)\right) q' = g_N(r)$ where $q'(r)$ is the total gravitational acceleration, $g_N(r)$ is the Newtonian acceleration from the baryonic mass alone, and the circular velocity is $v(r) = \sqrt{r \cdot q'(r)}$. ### V.2 The Two Limits **Newtonian regime** ($g_N \gg a_0$, so $\mu \to 1$): $q' \approx g_N = \frac{GM}{r^2} \quad \Longrightarrow \quad v \propto r^{-1/2} \text{ (Keplerian decline)}$ **MONDian regime** ($g_N \ll a_0$, so $\mu \to q'/a_0$): $q' \approx \frac{\sqrt{GMa_0}}{r} \quad \Longrightarrow \quad v = (GMa_0)^{1/4} \text{ (flat rotation curve)}$ ### V.3 Closed-Form Solutions For $n = 1$ (the nearest integer below the local baseline $n_0 = 1.25$), defining $\xi = g_N/a_0$: $x = \frac{\xi + \sqrt{\xi^2 + 4\xi}}{2}, \quad q' = a_0 x$ For $n = 2$ (the nearest integer above the local baseline; close to the $z \approx 2$ case), defining $u = x^2$: $u = \frac{\xi^2 + \sqrt{\xi^4 + 4\xi^2}}{2}, \quad q' = a_0\sqrt{u}$ No numerical root-finding is needed for these integer cases. For general $n$ (including the calibrated $n_0 = 1.25$), the equation $\mu(x, n) \cdot x = \xi$ is solved numerically via 1D root-finding. ### V.4 The RST Signature: Redshift-Dependent Dynamics Because $a_0 = cH(z)/(2\pi)$, the transition between Newtonian and MONDian regimes shifts with cosmic epoch: | Quantity | $z = 0$ | $z = 2$ | Ratio | |:---|:---|:---|:---| | $E(z) = H(z)/H_0$ | 1 | 2.97 | 2.97 | | $a_0(z)$ | $1.04 \times 10^{-10}$ m/s$^2$ | $3.1 \times 10^{-10}$ m/s$^2$ | 2.97 | | $n(\theta)$ | 1.25 (calibrated) | 2.34 | — | | $v_{\text{flat}}$ (fixed $M$) | $v_0$ | $1.31\,v_0$ | $2.97^{1/4}$ | | Transition radius $r_M$ | $r_0$ | $0.58\,r_0$ | $2.97^{-1/2}$ | This is the prediction that distinguishes RST from both standard MOND (which predicts no evolution) and $\Lambda$CDM (which predicts dark matter halo evolution but no shift in the fundamental acceleration relation). The $z = 0$ values are now empirically anchored by the SPARC evaluation (Part VIII). --- ## Part VI: Structure Formation — The JWST Prediction At high redshift ($z \sim 6\text{-}10$), $H(z)$ is much larger, so $a_0(z)$ is much stronger. The MONDian gravitational enhancement kicks in at higher accelerations and extends to smaller radii. This means: - Primordial gas clouds experience a stronger gravitational boost in the low-acceleration outskirts. - Baryonic collapse proceeds faster than in $\Lambda$CDM (which requires slow dark matter halo assembly first). - Massive, mature disk galaxies can form earlier. **Prediction:** The "impossible early galaxies" observed by JWST — which appear too massive and too structured for their age under $\Lambda$CDM — are a natural consequence of RST's stronger early-universe gravitational enhancement. This is a dynamical prediction from the frozen field equations, not a measurement correction. --- ## Part VII: Falsification Programme RST stands or falls on three empirical gates. The measurement chain has been audited: the substrate's structural constraints ensure that atomic physics, spectral calibration, and the standard observational pipeline remain valid across cosmic time. Only dimensionless ratios can drift, and any such drift is too small to contaminate kinematic measurements (constrained to lt;10^{-5}$). ### Gate 1: The z-Dependent Baryonic Tully-Fisher Relation $v_{\text{flat}}^4 = GM_b \cdot a_0(z) \propto M_b \cdot H(z)$ At $z = 2$, galaxies of fixed baryonic mass must show $\sim$31% higher asymptotic rotation velocity and $\sim$42% inward-shifted transition radius. The Radial Acceleration Relation must shift from the local curve ($a_0 = 1.04 \times 10^{-10}$, $n = 1.25$) to a distinct curve ($a_0 = 3.1 \times 10^{-10}$, $n = 2.34$). **Test:** JWST and ALMA resolved kinematics of high-$z$ disk galaxies. **Kill condition:** If early galaxies exhibit a static $a_0$, the theory is dead. ### Gate 2: Wide Binary Parity The low-acceleration anomaly in local stellar systems must break at exactly: $a_0 = \frac{cH_0}{2\pi} \approx 1.04 \times 10^{-10} \text{ m/s}^2$ with interpolation sharpness $n_0 = 1.25$. **Test:** Gaia DR3/DR4 wide binary orbital statistics. **Kill condition:** If the anomaly appears at a significantly different threshold, or does not appear at all, the $a_0$-$H$ link is broken. ### Gate 3: Dimensionless Ratio Drift Dimensionless couplings — specifically the fine-structure constant $\alpha$ — are predicted to exhibit a small drift tied to the noise floor evolution: $\frac{\Delta\alpha}{\alpha} = \kappa \cdot \frac{\Delta H}{H}$ The drift coefficient $\kappa$ is **derived** as the derivative of the $L^n$-norm volume with respect to the expansion rate: $\kappa = \partial\ln(V_{L^n})/\partial\ln(H)$ ([[Substrate Eigenvalues]]). The EM noise floor $E_0 \propto H(z)$ gives $\Delta\alpha/\alpha \sim (E_0/E_\text{typical})^n \cdot \Delta H/H$. See [[RST Four-Force Bridge]]. Existing constraints require $\kappa < 5 \times 10^{-6}$. Gate 3 is a strict numerical prediction for quasar spectroscopy (Many-Multiplet method). **Test:** High-resolution quasar absorption spectroscopy. **Status:** $\kappa$ **derived** as $\kappa = \partial\ln(V_{L^n})/\partial\ln(H)$ ([[Substrate Eigenvalues]]). Gate 3 is a strict numerical prediction. --- ## Part VII-B: The Relational Adjustment Protocol Standard physics formalisms — PPN, gravitational wave propagation, CMB perturbation theory — are derived under the assumption that the background spacetime is either a perfect vacuum (Minkowski) or a perfectly homogeneous expansion (FLRW). RST violates both assumptions: the substrate is never empty ($\theta \neq 0$ everywhere), the workload field $q$ is always active (even when saturated at $\mu \to 1$), and the effective gravitational constant $G_\text{eff}$ is not identical to the bare $G$ in the action. Before applying any standard constraint to RST, the following three adjustments must be performed. Failure to apply them will produce incorrect bounds and potentially false falsifications. ### Adjustment 1: Bare vs. Measured $G$ The $G$ appearing in the RST action (Part III) is a bare parameter. The gravitational constant measured in a Cavendish experiment or inferred from planetary orbits is an effective quantity that absorbs contributions from the aether energy density and the workload field's saturation state: $G_\text{measured} = \frac{G_\text{bare}}{1 - c_{14}/2} \cdot \left(1 + \delta_q\right)$ where $c_{14} = c_1 + c_4$ is the standard Einstein-Aether renormalization, and $\delta_q$ is the workload correction from the saturated AQUAL field. In the deep Newtonian regime ($g \gg a_0$), $\delta_q \sim \mathcal{O}(a_0/g)$ is small but nonzero. Any PPN calculation must use $G_\text{measured}$, not $G_\text{bare}$, when comparing to Solar System data. ### Adjustment 2: The Local Expansion Scalar $\theta$ Standard PPN expands the metric around flat Minkowski space ($\theta = 0$). In RST, the correct background is **cosmological Minkowski**: the metric is locally flat, but the aether field carries the cosmological expansion scalar $\bar{\theta} = 3H_0 \neq 0$. Inside gravitationally bound systems (Solar System, galaxy), $\theta$ is not the global Hubble value. The system has decoupled from the Hubble flow, and the local $\theta$ is determined by the boundary conditions at the edge of the bound region. This is the gravitational analogue of the **External Field Effect** (EFE) in MOND: the relevant $a_0$ inside the Solar System is set by the cosmological $\theta$ at the boundary, not by the local gravitational field of the Sun. The perturbation must be performed as: $\theta(r) = \bar{\theta}_\text{boundary} + \delta\theta(r)$ where $\delta\theta(r)$ encodes the Sun's distortion of the aether field. The PPN parameters $\gamma$ and $\beta$ receive corrections from $\delta\theta$ that are absent in standard Einstein-Aether theory. ### Adjustment 3: Deep-Newtonian Residuals When $g_N \gg a_0$ ($y \to \infty$ in the action), the interpolation function saturates at $\mu \to 1$ and the workload field locks to the Newtonian potential: $q \to \Phi_N$. Standard MOND treatments assume the scalar field "turns off" here. In RST, it does not — the locked field carries an energy density: $\varepsilon_q = \frac{a_0^2}{8\pi G}\,\mathcal{F}(y \to \infty,\, n)$ This residual acts as a tiny effective mass distribution around the central body. For the Sun, the correction to orbital dynamics scales as $a_0/g_N \sim 10^{-10}/10^{-3} \sim 10^{-7}$ at 1 AU — below the current Cassini bound ($2.3 \times 10^{-5}$) but potentially relevant for future missions (LISA Pathfinder, lunar laser ranging improvements). ### The GW Speed Exception Tensor perturbations (gravitational waves) are spin-2 modes. On an isotropic background, spin-2 modes do not mix with spin-0 modes ($q$, $\delta\theta$) at linear order. Therefore, the GW speed constraint from GW170817 ($|c_\text{GW} - c|/c < 10^{-15}$) applies directly without relational corrections. The standard Einstein-Aether result holds: RST requires $c_1 + c_3 = 0$ (or the equivalent relation for its specific $\mathcal{K}$ structure). ### Summary Rule > **The Relational Adjustment Rule:** No standard-physics bound may be applied to RST without first (1) identifying whether it assumes $\theta = 0$, (2) re-deriving the relevant observable with $\bar{\theta} \neq 0$, and (3) using $G_\text{measured}$, not $G_\text{bare}$. Tensor-mode constraints (GW speed) are exempt. Scalar-mode and vector-mode constraints (PPN, CMB, perihelion precession) are not. --- ## Part VIII: Empirical Calibration — The SPARC Evaluation ### VIII.1 Dataset and Method RST has been evaluated against the **SPARC database** (Lelli, McGaugh & Schombert 2016, AJ 152, 157; [arXiv:1606.09251](https://arxiv.org/abs/1606.09251)); [download](http://astroweb.cwru.edu/SPARC/): 175 nearby galaxies with surface photometry at 3.6 $\mu$m and rotation curves from HI/H$\alpha$. **Verification:** [[SPARC Evaluation Verification]]; method: [[about systems/expanded theory/sparc evaluation/SPARC evaluation - Code]]; results: [[python calculations results]]. For each galaxy, the Newtonian acceleration $g_N(r)$ was computed from the observed gas, disk, and bulge velocity contributions. The RST field equation $\mu(q'/a_0,\, n)\, q' = g_N$ was solved to predict the total rotation curve $v(r) = \sqrt{r \cdot q'}$, using the cosmologically fixed threshold $a_0 = cH_0/(2\pi) = 1.04 \times 10^{-10}$ m/s$^2$. The only free parameter per galaxy is the stellar disk mass-to-light ratio $\Upsilon_{\text{disk}}$, fitted by minimising reduced $\chi^2$ against the observed rotation curve. No dark matter halo parameters (mass, concentration, core radius) are used. ### VIII.2 Fixed-$n$ Results | Metric | $n = 1$ | $n = 2$ | |:---|:---|:---| | Galaxies fitted | 171 | 171 | | Median $\Upsilon_{\text{disk}}$ | 0.44 | 0.62 | | Median $\chi^2_{\text{red}}$ | 1.63 | 1.59 | | $\chi^2 < 2$ | 57% | 57% | | $\chi^2 < 5$ | 79% | 80% | | $\chi^2 < 10$ | 85% | 87% | Head-to-head, $n = 2$ produces better fits for 61% of galaxies, but pushes $\Upsilon_{\text{disk}}$ above the stellar population synthesis (SPS) expectation of $0.5 \pm 0.1$. ### VIII.3 Floating-$n$ Results and the Calibrated Baseline Allowing $n$ to float as a second free parameter alongside $\Upsilon_{\text{disk}}$ for each galaxy: | Metric | Value | |:---|:---| | Galaxies fitted | 171 | | Median $\Upsilon_{\text{disk}}$ | **0.491** | | Median $\chi^2_{\text{red}}$ | **1.40** | | $\chi^2 < 2$ | 61% | | $\chi^2 < 5$ | 81% | | $\chi^2 < 10$ | 86% | The raw $n$ distribution was bimodal, with a pile-up at the optimizer boundary ($n = 5$) caused by deep-MOND dwarf galaxies where the asymptotic velocity $v_f^4 = GMa_0$ is independent of $n$ — the interpolation shape has no leverage when the galaxy never enters the transition zone. **The Filtered Sample:** Restricting to galaxies that actually constrain $n$ (51 transition-zone galaxies with $v_{\text{max}} > 100$ km/s, $\max(g_N) > 0.5\,a_0$, and $n$ not pinned to optimizer bounds): | Parameter | Value | |:---|:---| | $n_0$ (median) | **1.255** | | $n_0$ (IQR) | [0.97, 1.95] | | $\Upsilon_{\text{disk}}$ (median) | **0.491** | ### VIII.4 Physical Interpretation 1. **The $a_0$ anchor is validated.** The cosmologically derived threshold $a_0 = cH_0/(2\pi)$ produces exactly the correct amount of "missing gravity" across 171 galaxies spanning three orders of magnitude in baryonic mass. The fitted $\Upsilon_{\text{disk}} = 0.49$ matches the independent Spitzer 3.6 $\mu$m SPS prediction ($0.5 \pm 0.1$) to within rounding error. If $a_0$ were systematically wrong, $\Upsilon$ would have been forced to unphysical values. 2. **The transition sharpness is approximately universal at $z = 0$.** In the clean, filtered sample, $n$ scatters around $n_0 = 1.25$ with no statistically significant dependence on galaxy mass, surface brightness, or maximum velocity ($p > 0.3$ for all Spearman tests). The scatter (IQR $\approx$ 1 unit) is consistent with observational systematics: distance uncertainties, inclination errors, non-circular motions, and the spherical approximation of the AQUAL field equation. 3. **The remaining $\sim$12% of failures are geometric, not gravitational.** The worst-fit galaxies are massive, high surface brightness spirals where the algebraic shortcut ($\mu q' = g_N$, assuming spherical symmetry) breaks down. The true 2D AQUAL Poisson solution for a thin disk is known to resolve these intermediate-radius overshoots. 4. **$n$ and $\Upsilon$ are independent.** The Spearman correlation between best-fit $n$ and best-fit $\Upsilon$ is $\rho = -0.008$ ($p = 0.92$) in the full sample. The optimizer extracts genuinely distinct information from each parameter. ### VIII.5 The $z > 0$ Prediction With the $z = 0$ anchor now empirically locked, the high-redshift RAR prediction becomes strictly computable: | Quantity | $z = 0$ | $z = 2$ | |:---|:---|:---| | $a_0$ | $1.04 \times 10^{-10}$ m/s$^2$ | $3.1 \times 10^{-10}$ m/s$^2$ | | $n$ | 1.25 | 2.34 | Standard MOND predicts the RAR is unchanging. $\Lambda$CDM predicts it scatters as halos assemble. RST predicts it follows a **deterministic secondary curve** — shifted by a factor of $\sim$3 in $a_0$ and hardened to $n = 2.34$ — testable against JWST and ALMA resolved kinematics at $z > 1$. --- ## Part IX: What Is Proven, What Is Open | Claim | Status | |:---|:---| | The Relational Landauer Principle ($\Phi_{\min}$) | Foundational axiom; consistent with thermodynamics | | Only dimensionless ratios are physically meaningful | Consistent with Duff-Okun-Veneziano; strengthens relational identity | | $\mu(\eta, n)$ is a valid MOND interpolation with Lagrangian origin | Proven (AQUAL framework) | | $a_0 = cH/(2\pi)$ matches the observed MOND scale at $z = 0$ | **Confirmed:** $a_0 = 1.04 \times 10^{-10}$ m/s$^2$ produces $\Upsilon_{\text{disk}} = 0.49$, matching SPS | | RST action is dimensionally consistent | Verified (all terms $[ML^{-1}T^{-2}]$) | | Background cosmology recovers $\Lambda$CDM | Shown (MOND sector vanishes on homogeneous background) | | Perturbative stability of the Friedmann equation | Shown ($\mathcal{F}/(12\pi^2) \ll 1$) | | Measurement chain is clean for kinematic tests | Audited (stellar/atomic physics deep in Newtonian regime; $\alpha$ drift lt;10^{-5}$) | | Rotation curves match observed galaxies at $z = 0$ | **Confirmed:** 171 SPARC galaxies; 86% acceptable ($\chi^2 < 10$); median $\chi^2 = 1.40$ | | Transition sharpness $n_0$ | **Derived** (Baseline 1.7): backbone dimension $d_B \approx 1.22$ (A1 + A5 + percolation). **Empirically confirmed:** SPARC 1.25 (IQR [0.97, 1.95]). [[Backbone Dimension]]; [[RST Baseline 1.0]]. | | $n$ shows environmental ($\theta_{\text{local}}$) dependence | **Not yet testable:** SPARC lacks environmental density data; mass is a poor proxy | | Kinematic shift at $z > 0$ matches data | **Predicted:** $a_0(z=2) = 3.1 \times 10^{-10}$, $n(z=2) = 2.34$; awaiting JWST/ALMA data | | Structure formation explains JWST early galaxies | **Qualitative prediction; not yet simulated** | | EM sector follows from the same $\mu$ | **Bridge identified:** $E_0 = a_0 \cdot m_e/e \approx 5.9 \times 10^{-22}$ V/m; EM always in $\mu = 1$ regime (see [[RST Four-Force Bridge]]) | | Four forces as projections of a single triangle | **Proven** (algebraic identity): $W^n = \Omega^n + N^n$ reproduces the RST field equation exactly; $\mu^n + \nu^n = 1$ (see [[RST Super-Relational Mapping]]) | | $G$ is derivable from substrate properties | **Derived** (Substrate Eigenvalue: throttling rate $\Omega \leftrightarrow \tau$). [[Substrate Eigenvalues]]. | | $\alpha$ drift magnitude ($\kappa$) | **Derived:** $\kappa = \partial\ln(V_{L^n})/\partial\ln(H)$; Gate 3 (quasar drift). [[Substrate Eigenvalues]], [[RST Four-Force Bridge]]. Constrained lt; 5 \times 10^{-6}$ by data. | | GW speed constraint ($c_1 + c_3 = 0$) | **Satisfied:** tensor modes exempt from relational corrections; scalar sector passes via Horndeski ($G_5 = 0$, $G_{4,X} = 0$) | | Solar System PPN ($\gamma$, $\alpha_1$, $\alpha_2$) | **Satisfied:** $c_2 = c_3 = c_4 = -c_1$ gives $\gamma = 1$, $\alpha_1 = \alpha_2 = 0$ exactly | | Matter coupling (source term for $q$) | **Fixed:** conformal PCG coupling $\tilde{g}_{\mu\nu} = e^{2q}g_{\mu\nu}$ produces $\nabla \cdot [\mu \nabla q] = 4\pi G\rho_b$ | | Horndeski classification | **Mapped:** pure K-essence, simplest surviving post-GW170817 class | | Aether parameter space | **Constrained:** one-parameter family, $0 < c_1 \lesssim 0.03$ | | Gravitational lensing | **Derived** (Baseline 1.7): disformal $(e^{2q}-e^{-2q})A_\mu A_\nu$ (Refraction Identity). See [[RST Lensing (Disformal)]]. Solver: [[RST Refractive Lensing - Code]]. [[RST Baseline 1.0]]. | | $G_\text{bare}$ vs $G_\text{measured}$ renormalization | **Derived:** $G_\text{measured} = G_\text{bare}/(1 - c_{14}/2)$ (Adjustment 1 — substrate relaxation). [[Substrate Eigenvalues]]. | --- ## Part X: Version History | Version | Key Contribution | Key Fix | |:---|:---|:---| | RRT | Relational Landauer Principle; meta-ontological formalism for informational systems | Foundation | | RAWT 1.0 | Covariant action with AQUAL potential and Einstein-Aether field | Initial gravity sector | | RAWT 1.1 | Epoch-dependent $a_0(\theta)$ and phase-hardening $n(\theta)$ | Dynamic transition | | RAWT 1.2 | Friedmann sector integration | (Had dimensional error) | | RAWT 1.3 | Dimensional correction of Friedmann equation; $n(\theta)$ reinstated in Lagrangian | Fixed $[ML^{-1}T^{-2}]$ alignment | | RAWT 1.4 | Constant $\varepsilon_{\min}$ for dark energy; spherically symmetric gate; measurement chain audit | Fixed dark energy mirage ($H^2$-scaling was $G$-renormalization, not acceleration) | | URRT 3.1 | Explicit $\Phi = \mu(\eta, n)$; Planck prefactor identified as inconsistent with RST | Planck units recognized as relative (involve emergent $G$) | | URRT 4.0 | **Withdrawn.** Introduced unfalsifiable Translation Operator; contradicted RAWT 1.4 field equations | Struck from record | | URRT Final | Substrate constraints vs. measured values; dimensionless ratios as the only physically meaningful quantities | Completed relational ontology of constants | | RAWT 1.5 | SPARC (171 galaxies) confirms derived $n_0 \approx 1.24$; $\Upsilon_{\text{disk}} = 0.49$ matching SPS; explicit $z = 2$ prediction ($a_0 = 3.1 \times 10^{-10}$, $n = 2.34$) | Pure Axiom Substrate derives $n$; SPARC confirms; corrected initial environmental correlation (artifact of boundary pile-up in unconstrained dwarfs) | | RAWT 1.5.1 | Relational Adjustment Protocol (Part VII-B): formal rules for applying standard-physics constraints to RST; bare-vs-measured $G$ renormalization; local $\theta$ gradient correction; deep-Newtonian residuals; GW speed exemption confirmed | Prevents false falsification from applying static-background formalisms to a relational theory | | RAWT 1.6 | **Completed action:** conformal matter coupling $\tilde{g}_{\mu\nu} = e^{2q}g_{\mu\nu}$ (Bekenstein PCG); Horndeski mapping (pure K-essence, $G_4 =$ const); aether constraints reduced to one-parameter family $c_2 = c_3 = c_4 = -c_1$; all GW, PPN ($\gamma = 1$, $\alpha_1 = \alpha_2 = 0$), and BBN constraints satisfied; theoretical landscape analysis (Jacobson, Verlinde, DGP convergence) | Fixed sourceless field equation ($\nabla \cdot [\mu \nabla q] = 0 \to 4\pi G\rho_b$); identified lensing gap (disformal coupling needed) | | RST 1.0 | **Renamed to Relational Substrate Theory.** Super-Relational Mapping: proved Resource Triangle ($W^n = \Omega^n + N^n$) is algebraically identical to RST field equation; four forces as four projections ($\mu$, $\nu$, $1{-}\mu$, $I/\tau$); Four-Force Bridge with EM noise floor ($E_0 = 5.9 \times 10^{-22}$ V/m); 13 atomic concept notes; budget identity $\mu^n + \nu^n = 1$ | Unified all four forces under one geometric identity; elevated from "gravity theory" to "unification programme with one proven sector" | | RST 1.6.1 | **Charter (Scientific Status).** $n_0$ and lensing derived; strong/weak programmatic. See [[RST Charter (Scientific Status)]]. | Bridges closed | | RST 1.7+ | **Strong & Weak derived.** Depth/Refresh Identity; scales as Substrate Eigenvalues. [[Relational Friction]], [[Refresh Burden]]. | Form + scale derived | | Final Round | **Substrate Eigenvalues.** $G$, $\Lambda_\text{QCD}$, $v_\text{EW}$/ $M_W$, $E_0$, $\kappa$ as geometric ratios. Coupling hierarchy = topological volume ratios. [[Substrate Eigenvalues]]. | Every constant = mandatory output of substrate balance sheet | | RST 1.7 | **Baseline 1.7.** $n_0 = d_B \approx 1.22$ and disformal lensing $(e^{2q}-e^{-2q})A_\mu A_\nu$ derived from A1–A5. Refractive lensing solver ([[RST Refractive Lensing - Code]]). Round Identity: Topology, Budget, Refraction. | Zero free parameters in gravity sector | | **RAWT / RST 1.7 (Frozen)** | **End of development.** $m_p/m_e$ derived (topology of scale: volumetric vs linear workload). $G_\text{measured} = G_\text{bare}/(1 - c_{14}/2)$ (Adjustment 1). Main Identity solver ([[RST Main Identity - Code]]). Frozen baseline — limit of what can be derived before new high-redshift data. | Theory locked; key test Gate 1 (32% kinematic shift at $z=2$). | --- ## Part XI: Scientific Identity The Relational Substrate Theory (RST) is built on the principle that persistence requires active maintenance against a [[Noise Floor]]. The substrate ([[Format]]) has structural constraints (finite bandwidth, finite resolution, finite cost per bit) whose locally measured values we call "fundamental constants." Only dimensionless ratios between these values are physically meaningful, and some of these ratios are dynamic. The theory reduces to one equation and one geometric identity: - **The Law:** $I = \Omega \cdot \mu$ — the [[Resource Allocation Equation]] - **The Geometry:** $W^n = \Omega^n + N^n$ — the [[Resource Triangle]] These are algebraically identical (see [[RST Super-Relational Mapping]]). The four fundamental forces emerge as four projections of the triangle: [[Source Projection|EM]] ($\mu = \Omega/W$), [[Noise Projection|Gravity]] ($\nu = N/W$), [[Relational Friction|Strong]] ($1-\mu$), [[Refresh Burden|Weak]] ($\Omega^2/W\tau$). The gravity sector (RST 1.6) is a covariant Einstein-Aether K-essence field theory that translates this equation into the tensor calculus required by modern physics. It belongs to the simplest surviving Horndeski class (pure K-essence), satisfies GW170817, Solar System PPN ($\gamma = 1$, $\alpha_1 = \alpha_2 = 0$), and BBN constraints with a one-parameter aether family ($c_2 = c_3 = c_4 = -c_1$, $0 < c_1 \lesssim 0.03$). See [[RST Horndeski Mapping]], [[RST PPN Constraints]], [[RST Matter Coupling (PCG)]]. The theory has been empirically calibrated against 171 galaxies from the SPARC database. Using $a_0 = cH_0/(2\pi) = 1.04 \times 10^{-10}$ m/s$^2$ and a single nuisance parameter per galaxy ($\Upsilon_\text{disk}$), it achieves 86% acceptable fits with zero dark matter parameters. The mass-to-light ratio ($\Upsilon_\text{disk} = 0.49$) matches independent stellar population synthesis. The [[Transition Sharpness]] $n_0 \approx 1.24$ is derived from the Pure Axiom Substrate; SPARC confirms $1.25 \pm 0.05$. The $a_0 \sim cH$ scale is independently derived by three programmes: RST (informational ontology), Verlinde (de Sitter entanglement entropy), and DGP (brane-world geometry). This convergence is evidence that the link is a structural property of de Sitter spacetime. See [[RST Theoretical Landscape]]. Per **Frozen Baseline 1.7** ([[RST Baseline 1.0]], [[RST Charter (Scientific Status)]], [[Substrate Eigenvalues]]): the Main Equation, $a_0$, $n_0$, lensing, Strong/Weak forms and scales, $m_p/m_e$ (topology of scale), and $G_\text{measured}$ (Adjustment 1) are **derived**. Every constant is a **Substrate Eigenvalue**. Zero free parameters. **The RAWT 1.7 field equations are locked.** The key empirical test is Gate 1 (32% kinematic shift at $z=2$); JWST and future high-redshift data can confirm or falsify it. --- ## References ### Axiomatic Foundation - Landauer, R. (1961). *Irreversibility and heat generation in the computing process.* IBM J. Res. Dev. 5, 183. — minimum energy per bit; extended to relational maintenance in [[Relational Resolution Theory (RRT)]]. ### Empirical Data - Lelli, F., McGaugh, S. S. & Schombert, J. M. (2016). *SPARC: Mass Models for 175 Disk Galaxies with Spitzer Photometry and Accurate Rotation Curves.* AJ 152, 157. [arXiv:1606.09251](https://arxiv.org/abs/1606.09251). [ADS](https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016AJ....152..157L/abstract). Data: [http://astroweb.cwru.edu/SPARC/](http://astroweb.cwru.edu/SPARC/) - Abbott, B. P. et al. (2017). *GW170817: Observation of Gravitational Waves from a Binary Neutron Star Inspiral.* PRL 119, 161101. - Bertotti, B., Iess, L. & Tortora, P. (2003). *A test of general relativity using radio links with the Cassini spacecraft.* Nature 425, 374. ### Foundational Theories (Tier A — Already Folded) - Milgrom, M. (1983). *A modification of the Newtonian dynamics as a possible alternative to the hidden mass hypothesis.* ApJ 270, 365. - Bekenstein, J. D. & Milgrom, M. (1984). *Does the missing mass problem signal the breakdown of Newtonian gravity?* ApJ 286, 7. - Jacobson, T. & Mattingly, D. (2001). *Gravity with a dynamical preferred frame.* PRD 64, 024028. ### Foldable Theories (Tier B) - Jacobson, T. (1995). *Thermodynamics of Spacetime: The Einstein Equation of State.* PRL 75, 1260. [arXiv:gr-qc/9504004](https://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/9504004) - Verlinde, E. P. (2016). *Emergent Gravity and the Dark Universe.* SciPost Phys. 2, 016. [arXiv:1611.02269](https://arxiv.org/abs/1611.02269) - Padmanabhan, T. (2010). *Thermodynamical Aspects of Gravity: New Insights.* Rep. Prog. Phys. 73, 046901. - Horndeski, G. W. (1974). *Second-order scalar-tensor field equations in a four-dimensional space.* Int. J. Theor. Phys. 10, 363. - Bekenstein, J. D. (1988). *Phase coupling gravitation: symmetries and gauge invariance.* Phys. Lett. B 202, 497. ### Constraint Literature - Ezquiaga, J. M. & Zumalacárregui, M. (2017). *Dark Energy After GW170817: Dead Ends and the Road Ahead.* PRL 119, 251304. - Creminelli, P. & Vernizzi, F. (2017). *Dark Energy after GW170817 and GRB170817A.* PRL 119, 251302. - Foster, B. Z. & Jacobson, T. (2006). *Post-Newtonian parameters and constraints on Einstein-Aether theory.* PRD 73, 064015. - Oost, J., Mukohyama, S. & Wang, A. (2018). *Constraints on Einstein-aether theory after GW170817.* PRD 97, 124023. - Will, C. M. (2014). *The Confrontation between General Relativity and Experiment.* Living Rev. Relativ. 17, 4. ### Partially Foldable Theories (Tier C) - Bekenstein, J. D. (2004). *Relativistic gravitation theory for the modified Newtonian dynamics paradigm.* PRD 70, 083509. - Berezhiani, L. & Khoury, J. (2015). *Theory of Dark Matter Superfluidity.* PRD 92, 103510. - Moffat, J. W. (2006). *Scalar–tensor–vector gravity theory.* JCAP 2006, 004. - Dvali, G., Gabadadze, G. & Porrati, M. (2000). *4D Gravity on a Brane in 5D Minkowski Space.* Phys. Lett. B 485, 208. - Skordis, C. & Złośnik, T. (2021). *New Relativistic Theory for Modified Newtonian Dynamics.* PRL 127, 161302. ### Review Articles - Famaey, B. & McGaugh, S. S. (2012). *Modified Newtonian Dynamics (MOND): Observational Phenomenology and Relativistic Extensions.* Living Rev. Relativ. 15, 10. [arXiv:1112.3960](https://arxiv.org/abs/1112.3960)