Gauge–Gravity Spectral Synthesis: Joint Einstein–Yang–Mills Equations, Born–Infeld Completion, and the Hierarchy Ratio from Projective Spectral Entropy

The companion papers Gravity 3.0 and Q12 derived, respectively, the Einstein tensor as the horizontal $a_2$ response and the Yang–Mills equations as the vertical $a_4$ response of the projective spectral entropy functional $S_\Pi[g,A] = \tfrac{1}{2}\log\det' \mathcal{A}_{g,A}$. The present paper carries out the gauge–gravity synthesis and establishes its central conceptual consequence: gravity and gauge dynamics are not unified by enlarging the symmetry group or adding fields, but are stratified by the Seeley–DeWitt level at which the same admissible operator responds to variation. The conventional question ``what symmetry unifies gravity and gauge?'' is thereby replaced by ``at what spectral order does the projection respond?'' We solve the joint variational problem $\delta_{g,A}S_\Pi = 0$ and derive the coupled Einstein–Yang–Mills system: the Yang–Mills stress tensor sources gravity through the metric dependence of the $a_4$ coefficient, with coupling constant $8\pi G_N = c_{YM}/c_{EH}$ fixed by the Seeley–DeWitt expansion alone. We compute the $a_6$ coefficient and identify the leading gauge–gravity cross-coupling $R_{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}F^{\mu\nu}F^{\rho\sigma}$. The Eddington–Born–Infeld completion of the joint functional is constructed from the same Born–Infeld saturation bound that governs the gravitational sector . The gauge–gravity hierarchy is a structural output of the spectral stratification: gravity is induced at $a_2$ (quadratic UV divergence) and gauge at $a_4$ (logarithmic UV divergence), from the same cutoff $\ell_{\mathrm{sp}}$, giving: \[ G_N g^2_{YM} \;\sim\; \frac{\ell_{\mathrm{sp}}^2}{\dim V} \cdot\Bigl[\log\frac{\Lambda}{\mu}\Bigr]^{-1} \;\ll\; 1, \] without fine-tuning. The spectral stratification $a_2 \to \text{gravity},\; a_4 \to \text{gauge},\; a_6 \to \text{mixed coupling}$ predicts that fermionic structure should appear at a dedicated spectral level carrying a Dirac-type admissible operator, which is the central open question for the continuation of the programme. The gauge group $G_\Pi$ is inherited from the spectral admissibility sub-programme ; the $\mathrm{SU}(3)$ sector is unconditional at the effective level: $[H\text{-color}]_{\mathrm{eff}}$ (equality of capacity exponents) is established analytically in .

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Published
2026-05-17
DOI
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.20262079
Primary Topic
Noncommutative and Quantum Gravity Theories
Type
preprint
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
preprint

Gauge–Gravity Spectral Synthesis: Joint Einstein–Yang–Mills Equations, Born–Infeld Completion, and the Hierarchy Ratio from Projective Spectral Entropy

Jérôme Beau
Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Noncommutative and Quantum Gravity Theories
preprint

Gauge–Gravity Spectral Synthesis: Joint Einstein–Yang–Mills Equations, Born–Infeld Completion, and the Hierarchy Ratio from Projective Spectral Entropy

Jérôme Beau
preprint en

Abstract

The companion papers Gravity 3.0 and Q12 derived, respectively, the Einstein tensor as the horizontal $a_2$ response and the Yang–Mills equations as the vertical $a_4$ response of the projective spectral entropy functional $S_\Pi[g,A] = \tfrac{1}{2}\log\det' \mathcal{A}_{g,A}$. The present paper carries out the gauge–gravity synthesis and establishes its central conceptual consequence: gravity and gauge dynamics are not unified by enlarging the symmetry group or adding fields, but are stratified by the Seeley–DeWitt level at which the same admissible operator responds to variation. The conventional question ``what symmetry unifies gravity and gauge?'' is thereby replaced by ``at what spectral order does the projection respond?'' We solve the joint variational problem $\delta_{g,A}S_\Pi = 0$ and derive the coupled Einstein–Yang–Mills system: the Yang–Mills stress tensor sources gravity through the metric dependence of the $a_4$ coefficient, with coupling constant $8\pi G_N = c_{YM}/c_{EH}$ fixed by the Seeley–DeWitt expansion alone. We compute the $a_6$ coefficient and identify the leading gauge–gravity cross-coupling $R_{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}F^{\mu\nu}F^{\rho\sigma}$. The Eddington–Born–Infeld completion of the joint functional is constructed from the same Born–Infeld saturation bound that governs the gravitational sector . The gauge–gravity hierarchy is a structural output of the spectral stratification: gravity is induced at $a_2$ (quadratic UV divergence) and gauge at $a_4$ (logarithmic UV divergence), from the same cutoff $\ell_{\mathrm{sp}}$, giving: \[ G_N g^2_{YM} \;\sim\; \frac{\ell_{\mathrm{sp}}^2}{\dim V} \cdot\Bigl[\log\frac{\Lambda}{\mu}\Bigr]^{-1} \;\ll\; 1, \] without fine-tuning. The spectral stratification $a_2 \to \text{gravity},\; a_4 \to \text{gauge},\; a_6 \to \text{mixed coupling}$ predicts that fermionic structure should appear at a dedicated spectral level carrying a Dirac-type admissible operator, which is the central open question for the continuation of the programme. The gauge group $G_\Pi$ is inherited from the spectral admissibility sub-programme ; the $\mathrm{SU}(3)$ sector is unconditional at the effective level: $[H\text{-color}]_{\mathrm{eff}}$ (equality of capacity exponents) is established analytically in .

Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Noncommutative and Quantum Gravity Theories
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.