God Plays Dice introduces a working hypothesis: our hot, dense cosmic beginning may have been the local aftermath of an energetic event in a larger, higher-dimensional setting.
That is the proposed idea. The book’s calibrated benchmark is distinct from later research, and fitting existing data does not by itself establish a successful prediction.
See the Test Ledger: every prediction the author wrote down, with a date, before the data could settle it.
Research snapshot
These are summaries of the author’s selected public records, reviewed on the date above. They describe proposed research and conditional results. They are not a live feed of the newest releases.
NASA’s timeline of the universe runs from the earliest moment scientists can probe, at left, to today. Its labels use earlier WMAP-era figures; ESA’s Planck later gave about 13.8 billion years. The glow at the far left edge is where this question lives.
Could our hot beginning be the aftermath of something larger?
Within a specified model, two inputs produce mathematically distinguishable responses. That conditional result does not establish a cosmic explosion, a physical energy source, or agreement with observations.
What the record supports—and leaves open
The author’s v24 publication reports an error-controlled response calculation inside a specified fixed-background, linear five-field model. A positive determinant enclosure establishes rank two under the inherited model, background-root, Green/source and stability premises. In plain language, two registered inputs produce mathematically distinguishable responses within those assumptions. This is a conditional mathematical result, not an observed cosmological signal or evidence that a higher-dimensional event caused the Big Bang. Physical source energy, detector noise normalization, an independent forward error enclosure, nonlinear persistence and agreement with cosmological observations remain open. The public release reports reproducibility checks, not independent external peer review. It is later research, distinct from the book’s frozen calibrated benchmark.
HDBLAST Zenodo v24 — Conditional Full-Domain Certification of the Registered Five-Field Linear Response
Record version: 2026.09.05-v24 DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.22347452
An artist’s concept of Gravity Probe B, which tested predicted spacetime effects with gyroscopes in Earth orbit.
NASA/MSFC, via Wikimedia Commons · Public domain · Image source ↗
02
Unification / Author’s research
Can one framework connect the forces of nature?
The record preserves results for a restricted mathematical kernel and corrects an earlier claim about a quantum calculation. A completed physical theory remains open.
What the record supports—and leaves open
This publication retains exact mathematical identities for a restricted neutrino tree-level kernel: its expansion, remainder, known-node reconstruction and approximation-error bounds. It corrects an earlier claim about a dimension-seven quantum loop calculation. The proposed cancellation remains conditional algebra; the loop coefficient and completed loop derivation are not established. Correct tree identities do not complete a physical Theory of Everything. The full operator reduction, quantum matching and connection to independently validated physical observables remain open. Replaying the supplied calculations establishes their stated computational scope, not experimental confirmation or independent expert peer review. This current correction must qualify older claims in historical archives.
Unified Theory of Everything Research Program — TOE-N00AK-r1: Exact Tree-Level Majorana Kernels and a Dimension-Seven Scope Correction
Record version: TOE-N00AK-r1 DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.22319172
The first image of a black hole’s shadow, released April 10, 2019: the supermassive black hole at the center of the galaxy M87, 55 million light-years away, with 6.5 billion times the Sun’s mass. The dark center is the shadow; the ring is hot gas whose light is bent by the black hole’s gravity.
Event Horizon Telescope Collaboration (ESO release eso1907a), cropped by a Wikimedia Commons uploader, via Wikimedia Commons · CC BY 4.0 · Image source ↗
03
Black holes / Author’s research
Could a black hole reveal more than its mass and spin?
A methods release explores how a proposed horizon response could be tested. Its archived calculations do not establish a detected effect at a black-hole horizon.
What the record supports—and leaves open
This methods release studies how a proposed black-hole horizon-response model might be tested through gravitational-wave ringdown. A fixed-conditioning archived calculation reproduces a reference grid, but changing a released parameter row changes the best-fitting damping. Statistical results explain why a finite measurement cannot uniformly separate one exact value from arbitrarily close alternatives under the stated continuity condition; meaningful comparisons need specified separation, intervals or a defined Bayesian procedure. These are conditional analysis and design results, not measured quantum structure at a horizon. Full observable information, joint inference, noise and calibration uncertainty, and full-search null calibration remain unresolved. The release does not claim detection of the HRF effect and is not an official LIGO/Virgo/KAGRA product.
The Bullet Cluster, two galaxy clusters that collided. Pink shows hot gas seen in X-rays, which holds most of the normal matter. Blue shows where gravitational lensing says most of the mass is. The two don’t line up.
X-ray: NASA/CXC/CfA/M. Markevitch et al.; optical: NASA/STScI, Magellan/U. Arizona/D. Clowe et al.; lensing map: NASA/STScI, ESO WFI, Magellan/U. Arizona/D. Clowe et al., via Wikimedia Commons · Public domain (NASA) · Image source ↗
04
Dark matter & energy / Author’s research
What could the dark side of the universe be made of?
The release repairs a validation procedure for early-universe calculations. Complete transport and light-element predictions are still missing.
What the record supports—and leaves open
The author’s DMDE working hypothesis is being tested through two fixed particle-injection scenarios and their possible effects on early-universe light-element formation. Version 0.9.20 repairs a demonstrated synthetic false pass by checking all five exported weak-reaction histories, including previously omitted capture channels. It adds source and numerical-precision checks for a controlled differential-response experiment. This improves the validation procedure; it does not produce the missing complete transport and nucleosynthesis results. The release contains no production helium, deuterium or effective-neutrino-number prediction. A passing validator cannot prove all relevant physics is included or independently establish what dark matter or dark energy are. Independent replay and physical review remain needed.
How would we test a claim about faster-than-light physics?
This is a procedure for testing hypothetical hidden sectors. Synthetic tests are not evidence of faster-than-light travel or signalling.
What the record supports—and leaves open
This FTL-only Einstein Audit release defines a strict procedure for testing proposed hidden sectors against causality, cosmic energy, pulsar-timing and ringdown consistency. It freezes required posterior-data inputs, validation gates and the conditional reporting procedure. Synthetic tests show that the procedure can execute; they do not show that faster-than-light physics occurs in nature. The strict real-data path remains dependent on suitable validated observational inputs. The release supplies neither strict real-data A2 posterior results nor evidence for faster-than-light travel or signalling. It is a methods and tooling publication, not a spacecraft design or a discovery that removes the ordinary relativistic speed limit.
Einstein Audit for Faster-Than-Light Hidden Sectors — A2 Strict Protocol Freeze and Provider-Return Gate
Record version: v1.2.1 DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.20218030
NASA illustration of an electron and positron meeting; the colors are visual labels, not the actual appearance of antimatter.
NASA’s Scientific Visualization Studio / Edgar Russell and David Leisawitz · Public domain · Image source ↗
06
Matter & antimatter / Author’s research
Why did matter survive the early universe?
The work explores whether interacting fields could help create an early matter excess. Energy limits and an unfinished mechanism remain central obstacles.
What the record supports—and leaves open
This theoretical checkpoint asks whether interacting fields could help produce early-universe matter asymmetry. An audited mathematical route fails the specified model’s gauge-symmetry requirement. A separate extra-dimensional Wilson-line construction reproduces a desired scale conditionally, but its complete interactions and cosmological history remain unfinished. At the inherited benchmark, required field motion exceeds the stated source budget; lower response efficiency increases that energy demand. Version 1.23.1 derives necessary efficiency-dependent bounds, not a realizable dynamical mechanism. It does not compute the observed matter excess or establish CP violation, transport and washout, relic safety or domain-wall consistency. Reproduced tables are computational checks, not independent physical validation.
AntiMatter: Wilson-Line and Cosmology Audit — Efficiency-Dependent Energy Bounds and Reproducibility Release
Record version: 1.23.1 DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.22400470
The 12 populations of Richard Lenski’s long-term evolution experiment on 25 June 2008. The cloudy flask, Ara-3 (labeled A-3), holds the population that evolved to use citrate, so it grows far more cells than the others.
Could mutation patterns be more predictable than they look?
An analysis and validation workflow studies proposed patterns in mutation routes. It does not establish a new evolutionary law or replace natural selection.
What the record supports—and leaves open
TMD studies mutation-route winner counts, proposed route biases, competing mechanistic explanations and the role of context. Version 2.6.4 supplies an analysis-only campaign and external-result validation workflow, including prerequisite checks, result intake, replay ledgers and verification. These tools help make a proposed biological test reproducible and inspectable. Passing software checks does not establish that the proposed pattern occurs in nature. The publication explicitly claims no new wet-lab experimental validation beyond its included benchmark, unit-test, smoke-test and example transitions. It neither establishes a universal new law of evolution nor replaces established evolutionary biology; appropriate external biological tests are still needed.
Theory of Mutation by Natural Dominance (TMD) — Closed-Loop External-Validation Runtime and Audit Ledger, v2.6.4
Record version: 2.6.4 DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.20186340
New stories, book updates, and notes from God Plays Dice, delivered when there is something worth sharing.
EMAIL UPDATES ↗
500 DIGITAL COPIES • GIVEAWAY PREVIEW
Be first to know when the 500-copy reader giveaway opens.
Join for the book launch, verified retailer links, and the announcement for a planned giveaway of 500 digital copies. The giveaway is not open yet: dates, eligibility, a dedicated entry form, and Official Rules will be published first.
Privacy · Check your inbox to confirm your subscription. Newsletter signup alone is not a giveaway entry.
