Postdictions vs Predictions

Transparent scientific methodology: What we used for calibration vs genuine forecasts

🔬 Scientific Transparency

Postdictions are values that RFT matches but were discovered prior to the theory's development. These serve as calibration points to validate our mathematical framework.

Genuine Predictions are forecasts made by RFT that have not yet been measured experimentally. These represent the theory's true testable claims.

✓ POSTDICTIONS

Used for calibration / validation
Known values that RFT reproduces for framework validation
Observable RFT Value Measurement Source Status
Higgs mass 125.08 GeV 125.08 ± 0.14 GeV ATLAS + CMS 2015 Validated
Weak mixing angle 0.23122 0.23122 ± 0.00015 PDG 2024 Validated
Scalar spectral index 0.965 0.9649 ± 0.0042 Planck 2018 Validated

âš¡ GENUINE PREDICTIONS

Make-or-break forecasts with no experimental data yet
Novel predictions that will test RFT's validity
Observable RFT Forecast Instrument Timeline Confidence Status
GW echoes after 30 M☉ merger 54 ms delay LIGO O5 2027 60% Pending
Dark-energy EOS today w₀ = −0.997 Euclid 2029 2030 80% Future
Axion mass ≈ 1 meV IAXO 2032 70% Future

📊 Important Note

RFT matches the postdiction values listed above, but these observables were discovered and measured prior to RFT's development. They serve as validation points for our mathematical framework, not as evidence of predictive power.

The genuine predictions represent RFT's testable claims that will either validate or falsify the theory based on future experimental results.