The model shows that the surface and volume of an object scale with mass such that electrostatic and gravitational acceleration can be explained through this scaling relationship. This is considered a geometric or structural cost:
C_s ~ m^(1/3) + m^(-2/3)
In terms of intrinsic acceleration, surface and volume scale with mass as:
a_i ~ m^(1/3) + m^(-5/3)
This relationship holds for any object with charge ≠ 0 across electrostatic and gravitational regimes, so the free fall principle is strictly recovered only for mathematically neutral objects.
This allows drawing an intrinsic acceleration curve for objects with homogeneous density, and the minimum point of this curve is identified at:
m_ϕ ≈ 4.157 × 10^−9 kg
If the surface and volume of a not strictly neutral object determine its dynamic behavior, this would theoretically allow measuring m_ϕ with precision and deriving G without the historical dependence on the Planck mass. In this sense, it is a falsifiable proposal.
The geometric logic of the model allows establishing a geometric or informational saturation limit that eliminates GR singularities. At the same time, fundamental particles are not treated as dimensionless points but as polyhedral objects, which also eliminates the quantum gravity problem. The concept of infinity is considered, within the model, physically implausible.
From here, the model allows making the derivations included in this post, which I have not presented categorically, but as a proposal that seems at least statistically very unlikely to be achieved by chance.
The model does not question the precision of the Standard Model but postulates that the particle zoo represents not a collection of fundamental building blocks, but the result of proton fragmentation into purely geometric entities. The fact that these entities are not observed spontaneously in nature, but only as a consequence of forced interactions, seems to support this idea.
