Summary: An exact commutator on the actual curved spatial geometry proves that the reconstructed all-band polynomial dynamics have no finite propagation speed, while leaving open causal nonlinear dynamics with selected simplex particle frequencies.

What the inverse frequency match does not settle

The inverse construction gives local Hermitian equations with exact frequencies ±μS(n,2m)\pm\mu S(n,2m) on their complete first Dirac pair. Their full canonical norm is conserved. However, every member of that polynomial class fails a finite-propagation test when used as a fixed equation for all spatial modes.

This conclusion follows directly on the specified physical CPm\mathbb{CP}^m geometry with line connection O(m−1)\mathcal O(m-1). It does not require a flat approximation, a positive-frequency projection or a group-velocity interpretation. The physical radius RR is arbitrary and finite. These remain ordinary macroscopic spatial directions; no direction is compactified.

The result constrains an inverse dynamical ansatz. A nonlinear particle mass is not required to equal the frequency of every small disturbance of one fixed quadratic background. Causal dynamics that select several nonlinear particle states remain a different problem. No particle depth or assigned mass index is changed by this test.

Finite propagation requires a bounded local commutator

Let HH be self-adjoint on the complete spatial field and U(τ)=e−iτHU(\tau)=e^{-i\tau H} its unitary evolution. A finite propagation speed cc means that every initial field supported in KK satisfies

supp⁡U(τ)ψ⊆{x:dist⁡(x,K)≤c∣τ∣}.(1) \operatorname{supp}U(\tau)\psi \subseteq\{x:\operatorname{dist}(x,K)\le c|\tau|\}. \tag{1}

For an ordinary first-order Dirac operator, its bounded commutator with a Lipschitz scalar function expresses its local spatial speed. See McIntosh and Morris, Section 1 for the first-order propagation theorem. The necessary estimate used here can be proved without assuming that HH is first order.

Let ff be a bounded real function with Lipschitz constant LfL_f. For τ≠0\tau\ne0, put r=c∣τ∣r=c|\tau| and δ=Lfr\delta=L_fr, and partition the field space using the multiplication projections

Ej=1{jδ≤f<(j+1)δ},fδ=∑jjδEj.(2) E_j=\mathbf1_{\{j\delta\le f<(j+1)\delta\}},\qquad f_\delta=\sum_j j\delta E_j. \tag{2}

Zero values of cc or LfL_f follow by using an arbitrarily larger positive bound or by observing that a constant function commutes. Two bins whose indices differ by at least three are separated by more than rr. Equation (1) therefore gives EjU(τ)Ek=0E_jU(\tau)E_k=0 when ∣j−k∣≥3|j-k|\ge3.

For each remaining index difference ℓ\ell, the operator ∑jEj+ℓU(τ)Ej\sum_jE_{j+\ell}U(\tau)E_j has norm at most one: its domain blocks are orthogonal, its range blocks are orthogonal and ∥U(τ)∥=1\|U(\tau)\|=1. It follows that

∥[fδ,U(τ)]∥≤δ∑ℓ=−22∣ℓ∣=6δ,∥[f−fδ,U(τ)]∥≤2δ.(3) \begin{aligned} \|[f_\delta,U(\tau)]\| &\le\delta\sum_{\ell=-2}^{2}|\ell|=6\delta,\\ \|[f-f_\delta,U(\tau)]\|&\le2\delta. \end{aligned} \tag{3}

The deliberately nonoptimal constant is sufficient:

∥[f,U(τ)]∥≤8c∣τ∣Lf.(4) \boxed{\|[f,U(\tau)]\|\le8c|\tau|L_f.} \tag{4}

For a smooth field ψ\psi such that ψ\psi and fψf\psi lie in the domain of HH, differentiate at τ=0\tau=0. Equation (4) implies

∥[H,f]ψ∥≤8cLf∥ψ∥.(5) \boxed{\|[H,f]\psi\|\le8cL_f\|\psi\|.} \tag{5}

Thus an unbounded commutator with one bounded smooth spatial function excludes a finite propagation speed for the full unitary equation. The argument applies on a compact spatial manifold as well: a finite diameter does not remove the small-time requirement.

Evaluate that commutator on the actual spatial field

Retain the complete inverse operator

Ha,b=Dc+μ[a(X0)T0+βb(X0)],X0=T02,T0=R2D0.(6) H_{a,b}=\mathscr D_c+ \mu\left[a(X_0)T_0+\beta b(X_0)\right],\qquad X_0=T_0^2,\quad T_0=\frac R2\mathscr D_0. \tag{6}

The other spinor families still have their operator Dc\mathscr D_c. All inverse candidates have

Xa(X)2+b(X)2=Pm(X)2,b(X)=Xm(2m)!+O(Xm−1).(7) Xa(X)^2+b(X)^2=P_m(X)^2,\qquad b(X)=\frac{X^m}{(2m)!}+O(X^{m-1}). \tag{7}

The overall negative sign allowed in the classification changes the sign of the following commutator but not its norm.

Use the global spatial function t=∣Z0∣2/∣Z∣2t=|Z_0|^2/|Z|^2. For the specified physical FS metric,

∣∇t∣2=4t(1−t)R2,Lt=1R.(8) |\nabla t|^2=\frac{4t(1-t)}{R^2},\qquad L_t=\frac1R. \tag{8}

It is a legitimate smooth state of the complete field. It need not be a positive-frequency eigenstate of (6). Multiplication by tt has the exact recurrence

tϕn=γnϕn+1+12ϕn+γn−1ϕn−1,γn=12(n+1)(n+2m−1)(2n+2m−1)(2n+2m+1).(9) \begin{aligned} t\phi_n&=\gamma_n\phi_{n+1}+\frac12\phi_n+ \gamma_{n-1}\phi_{n-1},\\ \gamma_n&=\frac12 \sqrt{\frac{(n+1)(n+2m-1)} {(2n+2m-1)(2n+2m+1)}}. \end{aligned} \tag{9}

The last term is absent at n=0n=0. The coordinate is an actual function on physical space; the index nn is a mathematical spatial mode label.

On zero forms, β=1\beta=1 and X0ϕn=xnϕnX_0\phi_n=x_n\phi_n, with xn=n(n+2m−1)x_n=n(n+2m-1). The term a(X0)T0a(X_0)T_0 changes form degree and Dc\mathscr D_c annihilates both ϕn\phi_n and tϕnt\phi_n. Consequently the zero-form component of the full commutator is

Π0[Ha,b,t]ϕn=μ{γn[b(xn+1)−b(xn)]ϕn+1+γn−1[b(xn−1)−b(xn)]ϕn−1}.(10) \begin{aligned} \Pi_0[H_{a,b},t]\phi_n =\mu\bigl\{& \gamma_n[b(x_{n+1})-b(x_n)]\phi_{n+1}\\ &+\gamma_{n-1}[b(x_{n-1})-b(x_n)]\phi_{n-1}\bigr\}. \end{aligned} \tag{10}

This projection only supplies a lower bound on the complete response. It is the local form-degree projection, not a projection onto one frequency sign. The odd component and all complementary equations remain present and cannot cancel an orthogonal zero-form component.

Define

Cn2=γn2[b(xn+1)−b(xn)]2+γn−12[b(xn−1)−b(xn)]2.(11) \begin{aligned} C_n^2={}&\gamma_n^2[b(x_{n+1})-b(x_n)]^2\\ &+\gamma_{n-1}^2[b(x_{n-1})-b(x_n)]^2. \end{aligned} \tag{11}

Equations (9)–(10) imply

∥[Ha,b,t]ϕn∥≥μCn.(12) \|[H_{a,b},t]\phi_n\|\ge\mu C_n. \tag{12}

For every root allocation in the inverse class,

γn⟶14,b(xn+1)−b(xn)=n2m−1(2m−1)!+O(n2m−2).(13) \gamma_n\longrightarrow\frac14,\qquad b(x_{n+1})-b(x_n)= \frac{n^{2m-1}}{(2m-1)!}+O(n^{2m-2}). \tag{13}

The other difference has the opposite leading sign. Hence

Cn∼n2m−18 (2m−1)!⟶∞.(14) \boxed{C_n\sim \frac{n^{2m-1}}{\sqrt8\,(2m-1)!}\longrightarrow\infty.} \tag{14}

But a finite propagation speed would require, by (5) and (8),

μCn≤8cRfor every n.(15) \mu C_n\le\frac{8c}{R} \quad\text{for every }n. \tag{15}

This is impossible for any fixed nonzero μ\mu and finite positive R,cR,c. It proves the failure of finite propagation on the full curved equation, including all nine coefficient pairs at depth six and all eighty-one at depth ten.

Real spatial depth Common growth of the lower bound CnC_n
Six n51208\frac{n^5}{120\sqrt8}
Ten n9362 8808\frac{n^9}{362\,880\sqrt8}

The asymptotic indices in this proof are test fields allowed by the proposed equation. They are not alternative particle assignments.

What can and cannot change this conclusion

The original first-order operator has [D,t][\mathscr D,t] equal to local Clifford multiplication by dtdt, up to the convention for ii. Its norm is bounded by 1/R1/R. This provides a direct curved-space control for the test above.

The same obstruction also applies to the direct insertion H=D+μβPm(X0)H=\mathscr D+\mu\beta P_m(X_0), even though that insertion keeps the original first-order kinetic term. On the test field ϕn\phi_n, its zero-form commutator is still (10) with b=Pmb=P_m; the ordinary Dirac commutator contributes only to the odd form. Thus promoting the polynomial mass coefficient to an operator on every spatial disturbance needs a causal completion as well. A coefficient obtained only on selected nonlinear stationary particle states is not covered by that promotion.

A fixed smooth multiplication potential cannot cancel (10); it commutes with tt. In particular, adding the specified local scalar term g(ψ†βψ)βψg(\psi^\dagger\beta\psi)\beta\psi has vanishing linearization at the zero field. Its small-amplitude equation still has the same obstruction. For a smooth local nonlinearity F(ψ†βψ)βψF(\psi^\dagger\beta\psi)\beta\psi, a nonzero F(0)F(0) adds only a multiplication term to that linearization.

Likewise, a fixed positive commuting kinetic metric in the inverse action gives iZf˙=ZHa,bfiZ\dot f=ZH_{a,b}f and the same evolution if˙=Ha,bfi\dot f=H_{a,b}f. That normalization does not repair (15). A different same-field dynamical completion would need to change the propagation equation itself.

A controlled effective reduction may retain the polynomial over a limited regime, provided its causal parent, retained modes, frequency range and approximation error are derived. A cutoff alone is not a proof of causal support. The local Dirac retarded response already illustrates how causal propagation can survive a same-field reduction when its full frequency dependence is kept. The instantaneous interaction test addresses a different source of acausality: an explicitly nonlocal instantaneous spatial potential.

Most importantly, (14) does not exclude a universal causal nonlinear equation whose distinct self-consistent particle solutions have selected simplex masses. That equation would have to generate the particle spectrum through its nonlinear spatial states and normalization, without imposing this unrestricted high-order dispersion on every disturbance.

The inverse scalar-law construction develops that alternative with the original Dirac kinetics. It tests the full spatial residual and the requirement that all particle candidates obey one function of the scalar current.

Verification

inverse_simplex_causality_checks.py checks exact finite differences for every root allocation at depths six and ten. Independent Jacobi polynomials and repeated application of the actual curved differential operator verify the full formula (10).

Physical curved quadrature and its refinement independently check the normalized recurrence. The paired matrix equation retains both frequency branches and verifies the complete norm lower bound. The original Dirac operator supplies the bounded local commutator control. Finite block contractions also check the range-partition estimate; the continuum proof is (2)–(5), not a conclusion drawn from those finite numerical examples.