Bilateral Mesh Simulation

Physical Observables from the First 25 Riemann Zeros
Dunstan Low — companion note to Binary \(\infty_0\) — ontologia.co.uk
Abstract The bilateral mesh framework identifies the Riemann zeros as the physical energy levels of the universe. This note reports a computational simulation using the first 25 Riemann zeros as input and extracts physical observables directly from the zero spectrum. Five results are confirmed: (1) the bilateral Hamiltonian constructed from the 25 zeros is nearly diagonal — the zeros do not mix, confirming they are the true energy eigenstates; (2) the mass hierarchy electron < muon < tau follows from the coiling phase formula \(m \propto |1-i^k|\times t_n\); (3) the Yang-Mills mass gap equals \(t_1/2\pi = 2.2496\); (4) the strong coupling \(1/\alpha_s(M_Z) = 8.477\) is recovered from 30 prime ladder rungs (observed: 8.48); (5) the force hierarchy SU(3) > SU(2) > U(1) follows from beta coefficient ordering. One honest negative result is reported: the direct spectral density mapping gives the wrong scale for SU(3), confirming that the prime ladder — not the zero index — is the correct energy map. A verification section (Section XIII) corrects an earlier normalisation error in the spectral rigidity calculation: The GUE baseline is computed by random Hermitian matrix diagonalisation. The zeros show \(\Delta_3\sim L^{0.04}\) compared to \(\Delta_3^{\rm GUE}\sim L^{0.34}\) — approximately 3× more rigid than GUE at \(L=150\), and ~11× more rigid than the GUE asymptotic formula. The two-regime structure (GUE at short range, anomalous rigidity at long range) is confirmed across 50,000 zeros (Odlyzko dataset). The simulation is not a lattice QFT computation. Physical observables are spectral invariants of the zero spectrum, making this approach computationally more tractable than conventional lattice methods.
Input: 25 Riemann zeros \(\{t_1, \ldots, t_{25}\}\)
One gate: \(U_\times = i\sigma_x\)
Output: energy levels, mass hierarchy, coupling constants, mass gap
The spectrum of \(\zeta(s)\) is the spectrum of the universe.

I. The Zero Spectrum as Input

The simulation takes as input the imaginary parts of the first 25 non-trivial zeros of the Riemann zeta function, computed to 15 significant figures. These are exact mathematical objects — not empirical inputs, not fitted parameters. The bilateral framework identifies them as the frequencies of the crossing modes of the bilateral mesh: the energy levels at which the ingress and egress faces of \(\infty_0\) are in exact balance.

\(n\)\(t_n\)\(\omega_n = t_n/2\pi\)Crossing period \(2\pi/t_n\)
114.1347251417346932.2496110.444521
221.0220396387715543.3457620.298886
325.0108575801456883.9806020.251218
430.4248761258595134.8422690.206515
532.9350615877391895.2417780.190775
637.5861781588256715.9820260.167167
740.9187190121474956.5124160.153553
843.3270732809149996.8957180.145018
948.0051508811671597.6402570.130886
1049.7738324776723027.9217510.126235

Each zero \(t_n\) defines a bilateral qubit \(|q_n\rangle = \alpha|{-}t_n\rangle + \beta|{+}t_n\rangle\) with \(|\alpha|^2 = |\beta|^2 = 1/2\) — enforced by the critical line condition \(|\chi(1/2+it_n)| = 1\). The simulation constructs the bilateral Hamiltonian from these 25 qubits and extracts physical observables from the resulting spectrum.

II. Result 1 — The Diagonal Hamiltonian

The bilateral Hamiltonian \(H\) is constructed with diagonal elements \(H_{nn} = t_n\) (the zero frequencies) and off-diagonal coupling \(H_{nm} = 1/(|t_n - t_m| \cdot n \cdot m)\) — suppressed by both the spectral separation and the mode indices. Diagonalising \(H\) gives eigenvalues indistinguishable from the input zeros themselves:

\(n\)Input \(t_n\)Eigenvalue \(E_n\)Difference
114.13472514.1338510.000874
221.02204021.0223330.000293
325.01085825.0113290.000471
430.42487630.4247880.000088
532.93506232.9352270.000165
Result 1 — The spectrum is diagonal
The Riemann zeros are the energy eigenstates of the bilateral mesh. Off-diagonal coupling between zeros is suppressed by spectral separation — zeros do not mix. The Hamiltonian does not need to be diagonalised: the zeros are already the diagonal. The energy spectrum of the universe is the zero spectrum of \(\zeta(s)\), and the simulation confirms this numerically to parts per thousand using only 25 zeros.

III. Result 2 — Mass Hierarchy

The binary coiling formula \(m(k,n) \propto |1-i^k| \times t_n\) assigns each generation a coiling level \(k\) and zero mode \(n\). The three charged leptons occupy \((k,n) \in \{(1,1),(2,2),(3,3)\}\):

ParticleCoiling \(k\)Mode \(n\)\(t_n\)\(|1-i^k|\)\(m \propto\)Ordering
Electron1114.1347\(\sqrt{2}\)19.990lightest ✓
Muon2221.0220242.044middle ✓
Tau3325.0109\(\sqrt{2}\)35.371heaviest ✓
Result 2 — Mass ordering correct
The electron is lighter than the muon which is lighter than the tau. The ordering follows from coiling phase × zero frequency with no free parameters. The ratios (1 : 2.10 : 1.77) are not the observed ratios (1 : 206.8 : 3477) — the Koide prefactors from the 720° spinor paper are needed for precise values. The binary simulation gives structure; the Koide paper gives values. This is the correct attribution.

IV. Result 3 — Yang-Mills Mass Gap

The Yang-Mills mass gap is the minimum energy above the vacuum in pure gauge theory — the lowest positive energy state. In the bilateral mesh, this is the frequency of the ground zero mode:

Yang-Mills mass gap from the simulation
\[\Delta_{YM} = \frac{t_1}{2\pi} = \frac{14.134725\ldots}{2\pi} = 2.2496\ldots\]
Result 3 — Yang-Mills mass gap
The ground-state spectral gap of the bilateral mesh is \(t_1/2\pi = 2.2496\). This is a specific, computable prediction for the Yang-Mills mass gap — one of the official Millennium Prize problems. The prediction is a conjecture within the bilateral framework: the gap exists, is positive, and equals \(t_1/2\pi\). Formal proof is open.

V. Result 4 — Strong Coupling from Prime Ladder Rungs

The running of the strong coupling from the GUT scale to \(M_Z\) proceeds via the bilateral prime ladder. Each prime \(p_k\) is one rung; descending 30 rungs from the unification scale recovers the observed coupling:

Strong coupling from prime ladder
\[\frac{1}{\alpha_s(M_Z)} = \frac{1}{\alpha_U} - \frac{b_0^{SU(3)}}{2\pi} \times n_{\rm rungs} = 42 - \frac{7}{2\pi} \times 30.09 = 8.477\]

The observed value is \(1/\alpha_s(M_Z) = 8.48\). The agreement to 0.04% uses only the established results: \(\alpha_U = 1/42\), \(b_0^{SU(3)} = 7\), and the prime count to \(M_Z\).

Result 4 — Strong coupling recovered
\(1/\alpha_s(M_Z) = 8.477\), observed \(8.48\) (0.04%). The prime ladder is the correct energy map from zero index to physical scale. This is consistent with the main paper's derivation and is confirmed by the simulation as the correct method — not the direct spectral density mapping.

VI. Result 5 — Force Hierarchy

The force hierarchy — QCD > electroweak > electromagnetic > gravity — follows from the beta coefficient ordering in binary:

Force hierarchy from all-ones binary patterns 3-bit all-ones = 111 = 7: b₀^SU(3) = 7 → strongest running → strongest force 2-bit all-ones = 11 = 3: b₀^SU(2) = 3 → intermediate running 1-bit all-ones = 1 = 1: b₀^U(1) ≈ 0 → no running → infinite range 0-bit: gravity → geometric, not gauge → weakest effective force
Result 5 — Force hierarchy from binary depth
The ordering of force strengths is the ordering of beta coefficients, which is the ordering of all-ones binary patterns at each depth: 111 > 11 > 1 > 0. No fitting. The hierarchy is a consequence of binary depth structure, not an empirical input.

VII. Honest Negative Result — Spectral Density Mapping

A natural hypothesis was that the running coupling could be read directly from the spectral density of zeros — the number of zeros per unit of \(t\). The smooth spectral density grows as \(\ln(t/2\pi)/(2\pi)\), which has the same logarithmic form as the RGE running. However, the direct mapping gives:

Direct spectral density prediction (incorrect)
\[\frac{1}{\alpha_s} = 42 - \frac{7}{2\pi} \times \int_{t_1}^{t_{MZ}} \rho(t)\,dt = 42 - \frac{7}{2\pi} \times 24.23 = 15.0\]

This gives 15.0, not 8.48. The direct spectral density integration uses the wrong energy map — it treats \(t\) as proportional to physical energy, but the correct map goes through the prime ladder (physical energy \(\propto e^{t/\sqrt{2\pi}}\), from the dark prime paper). When the prime ladder is used instead, the correct result is recovered.

Negative result — direct spectral density fails
The integrated spectral density \(\int \rho(t)\,dt\) does not directly give the coupling running. The prime ladder is doing real physical work: the map from zero index to energy scale is \(E_n \propto e^{t_n/\sqrt{2\pi}}\), not \(E_n \propto t_n\). This confirms that the prime ladder is not a convenience — it is the correct energy map, and the simulation demonstrates why.

VIII. Extended Simulation — 100 Zeros

Extending from 25 to 100 Riemann zeros (computed to 25 significant figures using mpmath) yields three further results and one new conjecture.

The M_Z scale is the 7-bit prime scale

The prime ladder rungs at which each force coupling crosses its observed \(M_Z\) value are:

ForceObserved \(1/ lpha\)Rung \(k\)Prime \(p_k\)BinaryBit depth
SU(3)8.4830.0912711111117 bits
SU(2)30.0025.1310111001017 bits
GUT42.0002101 bit

Both electroweak thresholds land on 7-bit primes. The GUT scale is the 1-bit prime \(p_1 = 2\). The hierarchy from GUT to electroweak spans exactly 6 bit positions. This is not an accident: \(6 = \dim_\mathbb{R}(\mathbb{CP}^2) + 2\) — the same 6 that appears in \( lpha_U = 1/(6 imes 7)\). The scale hierarchy is the bit-depth hierarchy, and its width is determined by the dimension of the colour space.

Result 6 — The electroweak scale is the 7-bit prime scale
\(7 = b_0^{SU(3)} = p_4\). The M_Z scale primes are 7-bit primes in the range [64, 128]. The GUT-to-EW hierarchy spans 6 bit positions \(= \dim_\mathbb{R}(\mathbb{CP}^2)+2\). The scale hierarchy is the binary depth hierarchy; its span is set by the dimension of the colour space.

Coupling predictions to \(<1\%\)

Using only \( lpha_U = 1/42\), \(b_0^{SU(3)} = 7\), \(b_0^{SU(2)} = 3\), and the prime sequence:

CouplingPredictedObservedDeviation
\(1/ lpha_2(M_Z)\)30.06330.000.21%
\(1/ lpha_s(M_Z)\)8.5778.481.14%

No free parameters. The residual 1.14% deviation in the strong coupling is the two-loop QCD scheme correction — an open calculation within the bilateral framework.

Result 7 — Couplings to <1% with zero fitting
The weak coupling is recovered to 0.21% and the strong coupling to 1.14% using only quantities derived from the binary structure. The prime sequence is the energy map; it is not a fitted input but an exact mathematical object.

New conjecture — the Higgs mechanism as a 6→7 bit transition

The electroweak symmetry breaks at the 7-bit prime boundary. The largest 6-bit prime is 61; the smallest 7-bit prime is 71. The gap \(71 - 61 = 10\) at this boundary is the binary symmetry-breaking transition. The conjecture: the Higgs mechanism occurs precisely when the bilateral crossing first reaches the 7-bit prime depth — the depth matching \(b_0^{SU(3)} = 7\). Above this depth (at GUT scale), the symmetry is restored. Below it (at the electroweak scale), the symmetry is broken.

Conjecture — status: open, not yet verified numerically
The identification of the Higgs mechanism with the 6→7 bit prime transition is a new conjecture arising from the simulation. The scale identification (EW ≈ 7-bit prime range) is confirmed. The formal connection to the Higgs VEV derivation in the main paper is not yet established. This is flagged as a direction for further development.

Negative result — \(K_ u\) cannot be read from zero values directly

A systematic scan of all Koide ratios from triples of zeros found no triple with \(K pprox 1/2\) to better than 31% deviation. This is the expected and correct result. \(K_ u = 1/2\) is a topological invariant of \(\mathbb{CP}^2\) (\(\mathrm{Vol}(\mathbb{CP}^2)/\pi^2 = 1/2\)) — it is not readable from the zero values themselves but from the geometry of the space the zeros live on. The simulation confirms that the geometric derivation is doing real work, not merely echoing the zero statistics.

IX. 1000-Zero GUE Verification

Extending to 1000 Riemann zeros (computed to 20 significant figures) allows statistical tests of the bilateral mesh's quantum statistics. Three independent statistics are computed.

Nearest-neighbour spacing distribution

The nearest-neighbour spacing distribution is the distribution of gaps between consecutive unfolded zeros. The GUE Wigner surmise predicts \(P(s) = (32/\pi^2)\,s^2\,e^{-4s^2/\pi}\) — the characteristic level-repulsion of a random unitary ensemble. The total squared error against each distribution:

DistributionTotal squared errorPhysical meaning
GUE0.085No time-reversal symmetry — complex Hamiltonian
GOE0.353Time-reversal symmetric — real Hamiltonian
Poisson2.400Uncorrelated levels — integrable system

GUE wins unambiguously. The Riemann zeros are not from an integrable or time-reversal-symmetric system.

Level spacing ratio

The ratio statistic \(r_n = \min(s_n, s_{n-1})/\max(s_n, s_{n-1})\) is more robust than the spacing distribution. From 1000 zeros:

Level spacing ratio — 1000 zeros
\[\langle r angle = 0.6173 \pm 0.0068\] \[ ext{GUE: } 0.5996 \qquad ext{GOE: } 0.5307 \qquad ext{Poisson: } 0.3863\]

The observed value is 2.6\(\sigma\) from GUE, 12.8\(\sigma\) from GOE, and 34.1\(\sigma\) from Poisson. The 2.6\(\sigma\) GUE deviation is finite-size: at \(N=1000\), small deviations from the \(N o\infty\) limit are expected. GUE is the clear identification.

Result 8 — GUE statistics confirmed to 3%
The 1000-zero bilateral mesh obeys GUE (Gaussian Unitary Ensemble) statistics. The level spacing ratio \(\langle r angle = 0.617\) is 2.6\(\sigma\) from GUE (consistent with finite-size effects) and 12.8\(\sigma\) from the next closest ensemble (GOE). The nearest-neighbour spacing distribution confirms GUE with a 4× smaller error than GOE.

Bilateral interpretation of GUE

This result is not a surprise — it is what the bilateral framework predicts. GUE is the ensemble of random Hermitian matrices with complex entries, invariant under \(H o U^\dagger H U\) for any unitary \(U\). In the bilateral framework:

These together force GUE. The Montgomery-Odlyzko law — the empirical observation that Riemann zeros follow GUE statistics — is a consequence of the bilateral axioms. A2 + unitary structure + broken time-reversal = GUE.

Result 9 — The arrow of time is in the statistics
GUE statistics require broken time-reversal symmetry. A3 (\( au\) monotonically increasing) is the bilateral statement that time has a direction — it cannot decrease. The Möbius phase makes the Hamiltonian complex. Together they force GUE. The arrow of time (A3) is numerically visible in the spectral statistics of the Riemann zeros.

Spectral rigidity — higher than GUE at long range

The spectral rigidity \(\Delta_3(L)\) shows the zeros are more rigid than GUE at long range. The GUE baseline was computed by diagonalising random Hermitian matrices (\(N=1500\), semicircle unfolding, bulk 60%, averaged over 3 realisations) — the correct method for \(\Delta_3\) computations. The power-law scaling is:

Sequence\(\Delta_3(L)\) scalingAt \(L=150\)
Riemann zeros\(\sim L^{0.04}\) — nearly flat0.064
GUE matrix (correct)\(\sim L^{0.34}\) — moderate growth0.204
GUE asymptotic theory\(\sim \ln L\)0.729
Poisson\(\sim L^{1.0}\) — linear8.851

The zeros are approximately 3× more rigid than the GUE matrix baseline at \(L=150\), and approximately 11× more rigid than the GUE asymptotic formula. The finding is confirmed across \(N=1{,}000\) to \(N=50{,}000\) zeros (Odlyzko dataset), spanning \(t_n\in[14,\,130{,}000]\). The two-regime structure (GUE locally, anomalously rigid globally) is confirmed.

X. The Two-Regime Discovery

Combining the short-range and long-range results gives a clear two-regime structure, confirmed with the correct GUE matrix baseline and verified across 50,000 zeros:

Range\(\Delta_3^{\rm zeros}/\Delta_3^{\rm GUE\,matrix}\)Regime
\(L < 5\)0.81Consistent with GUE (local)
\(L = 5\text{–}20\)0.54–0.72Crossover
\(L > 20\)0.31–0.54Anomalously rigid (global)

At short range the zeros match GUE — confirming the Montgomery–Odlyzko law. At long range the zeros are consistently more rigid. The crossover occurs near \(L\approx 10\text{–}20\) unfolded spacings. The result is consistent with arithmetic corrections to GUE statistics predicted by Bogomolny and Keating (1996), who showed that the prime number structure introduces deviations from GUE at large \(L\). A journal paper on this finding (corrected with proper GUE matrix baseline) is in preparation.

XI. What the Simulation Is — and Is Not

This simulation is not a lattice QFT computation. Lattice QCD discretises spacetime on a grid and evaluates the path integral numerically — an enormously expensive computation requiring supercomputers and giving results with percent-level uncertainties after decades of work. The bilateral simulation does something structurally different.

The bilateral mesh identifies the Riemann zeros as the exact energy eigenstates of the universe. Physical observables are spectral invariants — they are read from the zero spectrum directly, without path integral evaluation, without discretisation of spacetime, and without ultraviolet cutoffs. The simulation confirms that the Hamiltonian is diagonal — the zeros do not mix — which means no diagonalisation is needed. The spectrum is given exactly by the zeros, and the zeros are exactly computable.

The computational advantage is significant. The first \(10^{22}\) Riemann zeros have been computed numerically. Extracting Standard Model observables from a larger zero set — extending this simulation to \(N = 10^6\) or \(N = 10^{10}\) zeros — is a tractable numerical computation on current hardware. Lattice QCD at equivalent precision is not.

Open direction
The next simulation step is to extend from 25 to \(10^4\) or more zeros using high-precision zero databases (LMFDB), compute the coupling running more precisely using the prime ladder map, and extract the neutrino mass ratio \(K_\nu\) from the zero spectrum directly. The prediction \(K_\nu = 1/2\) (inverted ordering, \(m_3 = 0\)) should be recoverable as a spectral invariant of the zero spectrum without any additional input.
On the status of this simulation. The computation reported here is exact within its stated inputs — the first 25 Riemann zeros are known to the precision used. The five results are confirmed numerically. The negative result (spectral density mapping) is an honest finding, not a failure: it correctly identifies the prime ladder as the physical energy map. The Yang-Mills mass gap prediction (\(t_1/2\pi = 2.2496\)) is a conjecture; the bilateral framework gives a specific value but not a formal proof. The coupling constant recovery (Result 4) uses the prime ladder rung count established in the main paper — the simulation confirms the method is consistent, not that it independently derives the coupling. The spectral rigidity finding (Sections IX–X) — approximately 3× more rigid than GUE matrix at long range — is confirmed across 50,000 zeros using the Odlyzko dataset. Dunstan Low · ontologia.co.uk