FALS — FALSIFICATION
Definition: Criteria that would disprove the theory if observed.
Epistemological Role
- Popperian: Makes theory scientific (falsifiable)
- Honest: Admits what would kill the theory
- Testable: Can be checked empirically
Test for Falsification Status
“Would observing this disprove the theory?”
- If YES → Falsification criterion
- If it would just weaken → Evidence against
- If it’s untestable → Not scientific
Count
3 Falsification criteria in the full spine
The Falsification Criteria
| ID | Name | Would Falsify If… |
|---|---|---|
| FALS18.1 | Chi Field Falsification | χ effects never detected after sufficient search |
| FALS18.2 | Grace Falsification | Coherence increase without external input observed |
| FALS18.3 | BC Falsification | Religion satisfying all 8 BCs other than Christianity found |
Full List
See: FALS - Falsification
What Each Would Kill
| Criterion | If Falsified → |
|---|---|
| FALS18.1 | χ is not real — Information Primacy (A1.3) fails |
| FALS18.2 | Sign Conservation (A8.2) fails — self-salvation possible |
| FALS18.3 | Christianity uniqueness claim (T16.1) fails |
Why This Matters
A theory that can’t be falsified isn’t science — it’s unfalsifiable metaphysics.
Theophysics commits to specific claims that could be proven wrong. This is intellectual honesty.
Falsification criteria are the theory’s exposed neck. We’re showing where to strike.