Falsification Framework: Test Criteria & Exit Conditions

This work is designed to be falsifiable. That is its entire point.

Algorithm Falsification Criteria

TAE is falsified if ANY hold:

❌ Braid compilation overhead > polynomial(log(1/ε))
❌ Oracle implementation dominates (EXPECTED TRUE → no advantage)
❌ Fusion space QFT requires exponential braid depth
❌ Topological error rate NOT better than surface codes for N < 10⁴
❌ Anyon operations take > 1 ms

Status: Algorithm is EXPECTED to show no advantage (Grover already optimal). This is correct result.

Architecture Falsification Criteria

Physical realization is falsified if ANY hold:

❌ ν = 12/5 FQH state NOT realized in 2DEG by 2035
❌ Thermal anyon density > 10⁻⁶ per μm² at 10 mK
❌ Braid adiabatic time > 1 μs
❌ Interferometric visibility < 90% for 4-anyon measurement
❌ Individual anyon addressing requires > 10 voltage gates per anyon

Status: None falsified, none confirmed. All remain open experimental questions.

Experimental Validation Phases

Phase 1 (Classical): SHA-520-r test vectors match the repository reference implementation Phase 2 (Quantum): Toy 4-round simulation > 80% success Phase 3 (Resources): Estimated vs actual deviation < 20% Phase 4 (Topological): Braid compilation polynomial-scale (theory only)

Exit Strategy

If falsified: Archive permanently, mark "falsified by [criterion]", cease development. If validated: Proceed to next phases; conjectures require physical experiment.

What This Does NOT Claim

Breaks SHA-512/SHA-3 (no asymptotic advantage)
Topological QC is ready (ν=12/5 not realized)
Topological protection eliminates error correction (still active)
Beats surface codes (unproven, likely loses overhead)
This is a threat (research model only)

Falsification locked. Exit strategy fixed. No rewrites without consensus.