Universal Constitutional Participation and the Physical Meaning of Measurement: Constitutional Admissibility, Target-Specific Reconstruction, and Cross-Domain Empirical Evidence

The Universal Laws of Contrast and Connection identify intrinsic physical differentiation and necessary constitutional participation throughout this physical universe. In their published hyperrelational formulation, universal connectedness is equivalent to crossing participation across every proper physical cut; the equivalence with multiscale Contrast uses the specified component-coverage condition. Every measurement therefore belongs to the physical constitution containing the measured constituent, apparatus, observer, and environment. We develop a claim-level scientific validation method that separates (i) physical registration, (ii) its fidelity and conditional statistics, (iii) the target attributed to it, and (iv) any claim of complete constitutional independence. The published exact reconstruction criterion determines when a target is constant across all admissible configurations yielding one record. We extend its application to stochastic experiments by requiring target agreement whenever admissible configurations define identical ideal outcome laws, while separately treating inference from finite records and their sampling assumptions. Complete-representation admissibility under the all-cut requirement and target-specific identification are distinct validation gates. A reduced model creates no physical boundary, and missing recorded relations do not establish physical isolation. Exact counterexamples demonstrate that identical local records leave different joint correlations unresolved; conditional quantum measurements distinguish correlations omitted by unconditioned marginals. Primary experimental investigations of quantum processors, gravitational-clock comparisons, double-slit and which-path experiments, photon interference, and superconducting detectors show quantitatively how results depend on recorded experimental circumstances. These studies establish particular physical outcomes and their interpretive requirements; the universal scope of the laws follows from their foundational formulation, not from extrapolating experimental samples. The contribution is the integration of constitutional necessity with target-specific deterministic and stochastic identification into a usable method for assessing the physical meaning of experimental claims. An actual recorded value is a physical result; the reliability of that record and the further physical attribution demand their own evidence. Related publications Foundational laws: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.23820136 Foundational scientific archive: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.23820145 Empirical reproducibility archive: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.23897916