This archive provides the preprint and Mathematica code for a modified-gravity framework based on energy-weighted Fermion–Boson Duality (FBD). The approach explains flat galaxy rotation curves without dark matter and proposes a clean, discriminating test using wide binary stars. The key ingredient is a distance-dependent statistical transition function, T (r) = 1 + exp ( (r − rfb) /λ) ^−1, which smoothly connects Newtonian gravity (inner regions) to an enhanced-gravity regime (outer regions). The transition radius is rfb = sqrt (GM/a0), and the same scaling is applied across multiple mass scales (galaxies to binaries). For galaxies, the framework naturally reproduces the baryonic Tully–Fisher relation (v⁴ ∝ M) and provides a statistical–mechanical interpretation of the MOND acceleration scale a0 ≈ 1. 2×10^−10 m/s². For wide binaries, FBD predicts a sharper (more Newton-consistent) behavior in the transition region: around s ≈ rfb, FBD remains nearly Newtonian (η ≈ 1. 0), whereas MOND predicts a significant enhancement (η ≈ 1. 13–1. 27), depending on the MOND interpolation function. The expected difference (about 11–21% in the transition region) is, in principle, testable with high-precision data and is discussed in the context of the ongoing Chae (2023) vs. Banik et al. (2024) debate. The included Mathematica notebook reproduces the tables/figures and exports the PDF figures used in the manuscript, including an explicit FBD–MOND comparison (Simple/Standard/RAR interpolation choices) and an observation-comparison figure. Version history Version 5: Restructured the theoretical foundation to make explicit the development lineage QED → QCD → Gravity, with QCD-FBD serving as the formal bridge that justifies the replacement of energy-dependence by distance-dependence via the natural inverse-proportional correspondence between energy and distance in QCD. Repositioned the extension from QCD to gravity as an expansion of the domain of applicability of an effective theory, rather than a direct derivation, in order to clearly delineate the logical status of each step. Added a boxed summary of the cross-scale development lineage (QED → QCD → Gravity) and a boxed contrast with MOND emphasizing that the FBD transition function is uniquely determined by two-state statistical mechanics, whereas MOND interpolation functions are chosen empirically. Expanded the discussion of alternative transition-function formulations (logarithmic-distance version Tₗog and acceleration-ratio version Tₐ), with a new appendix section on the properties of Tₗog. Added quantitative sensitivity analysis of the Newtonian recovery at r → 0 as a function of the width parameter α (Table: T (0) vs. α), and clarified the physical acceptance criterion (α ≲ 0. 15 for Solar System compatibility, α = 0. 2 adopted as the standard value). Strengthened the structural analogy between galactic-scale FBD and QCD confinement (both share the feature that the F-type mediating component dominates at long range), explicitly contrasting this with the Yukawa (nuclear-force) behavior. Expanded the Limitations and Future Challenges section to include: (i) the need to re-derive the energy–distance correspondence at gravitational scales from first principles, (ii) the general-relativistic (covariant) extension required for lensing/time-delay/cosmology, (iii) the galaxy-cluster problem, (iv) potential issues with cosmological extrapolation, and (v) the formulation of EFE within the FBD transition function argument. ・ Version 4: ・ Major revision: expanded from galaxy rotation curves to a multi-scale framework including wide binary stars. ・Added a dedicated FBD vs. MOND comparison (η in the transition region) and updated the discriminant range to ηMOND ≈ 1. 13–1. 27 (thus FBD–MOND difference ≈ 11–21%). ・Added wide-binary formulation/predictions, observational comparison (Chae 2023 vs. Banik et al. 2024), and an expanded discussion of external-field effects (EFE). ・ Reorganized the archive files accordingly (manuscript Ver4 + MOND-comparison code/output). ・ Version 3: ・Added §7. 2 “Qualitative Analogy with QCD” discussing structural similarity between QCD confinement/asymptotic freedom and galactic FBD transitions. ・ Added references: Gross & Wilczek (1973), Politzer (1973). ・ Minor figure improvements: adjusted plot ranges and legend positions in selected figures. ・Version 2: ・Ensured dynamical consistency by defining acceleration as the primary quantity and deriving potential by integration.
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Hirokazu Maruyama
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Hirokazu Maruyama (Sat,) studied this question.
www.synapsesocial.com/papers/69ada935bc08abd80d5bc91c — DOI: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18897623