Great Challenges

Measuring possible variations of the fine structure constant relative to the primordial universe, and possible variations of G, the gravitational constant, in high regimes and relative to the primordial universe.

To tackle these, the community is considering scaling up infrastructure, improving sensitivity through technology or the L2/Lunar environment, and cross-correlation — essentially multi-messenger astronomy, where cosmological laws intersect with particle physics.

Does the Fine Structure Constant Change with Cosmic Time? First Constraint from Galaxies at z 5 with JWST

What is this about?

The fine structure constant (α) is one of the fundamental constants of nature: it controls the strength of the electromagnetic interaction. If α had varied throughout the history of the universe, physics as we know it would be different. That is why measuring α in remote epochs of the cosmos is one of the most direct tests we have to know whether the fundamental laws are truly constant.

What did I do?

I used 212 galaxies at z 5 (when the universe was less than 1.2 billion years old) observed with the NIRSpec instrument on the James Webb Space Telescope, within the JADES DR3 survey. I combined the Hβ (4862.68 Å) and [OIII] (5008.24 Å) emission lines in a rest-frame stacked spectrum, and compared their positions with laboratory values to search for a possible relative variation Δα/α.

What did I find?

- Δα/α = +3.02 ± 5.73 ppm (statistical, via bootstrap with 100 iterations)

- Consistent with zero variation at 0.53σ

- 2σ upper limit: |Δα/α| < 1.15 × 10⁻⁵

The dominant systematic is the per-object dispersion (272 ppm), which I corrected with a multiline redshift (Hβ, Hα, [OIII], [NII]).

Why does it matter?

This is, to my knowledge, the first upper limit on Δα/α at z 5 using emission lines. The advantage of using emission instead of absorption (as is done with quasars) is that it eliminates the non-uniqueness of models that affects absorption studies, a potential bias of up to ~2.5 ppm.

What's next?

The current sensitivity floor is at ~10⁻⁵, dominated by Hβ. To reach 10⁻⁶ it would be necessary to model Hβ more carefully (broad wings, Balmer absorption) and refine redshifts with machine learning techniques. I also plan to extend the analysis to the CEERS, UNCOVER, PRIMER and Roman surveys, and to validate the method with JWST quasars at z 5.

Closing line for the post:

 "At z 5, the fine structure constant remains consistent with a constant. But the precision is not yet enough to rule out variations of the order of 10⁻⁶. The next leap will come from the combination of JWST, Euclid and Roman."

 

Advanced strategies for measuring α in the primordial universe

Starting from the theoretical and methodological foundations of the VCV48 model — a new crystallographic alternative of the vacuum — together with the other six proposals detailed below, advanced procedures can be put forward to drastically improve the precision and sensitivity in the measurement of the fine structure constant (α) in the primordial universe and at high redshift.

 The six main proposals (together with VCV48)

1. VCV48: crystallographic alternative of the vacuum

The VCV48 model proposes a crystallographic description of the quantum vacuum, where the vacuum lattice presents a coherent phase structure that can be modulated as a function of the baryonic density and the local gravitational field. This is the theoretical basis on which the following methodological proposals rest.

2. Stacking and strict S/N selection with JWST

Given the limitations of individual high-depth samples (low initial statistical significance), it is proposed to use raw spectroscopic data from JWST to implement massive galaxy stacking or apply rigorous filtering that selects only spectra with high S/N. This allows the experimental error bar to be reduced below the predicted drift threshold.

3. High-resolution spectrographs (ELT/ANDES)

Achieve an instrumental precision of ~ppm to isolate the signature of the vacuum lattice in regions of low cosmic density (voids). This is complemented by the application of the real-time drift test (Sandage effect) over a 20-year time horizon with cm/s stability.

4. High-statistics mapping (Roman)

Extend the void structural mapping analysis toward lower-z regimes by taking advantage of the large-area surveys of the Roman Space Telescope, focusing specifically on the evaluation of harmonic 10 to correlate local fluctuations with the orientation of the lattice.

5. Elastic response in protoclusters (Euclid + JWST)

Measure with high spectroscopic precision the spectral index in massive protoclusters at z ~ 2–4, seeking a direct correlation with halo mass, requiring a demanding instrumental stability threshold to overcome the variance in emission-line sensitivity.

6. Cross-correlation between the CMB and Large-Scale Structure (LSS)

Implement galaxy stacking on CMB temperature maps to isolate the modulation of the integrated Sachs-Wolfe effect (ISW), which depends directly on the elastic response function and the halo mass.

7. Optimization in local massive clusters

Prioritize the selection of galaxies in local massive clusters with moderate to high velocity dispersions (σ ~ 500–1000 km/s), because in this regime the phase coherence of the lattice reaches its maximum values and global systematic errors are duly bounded below 15%.

 Why extreme cosmological scales?

To isolate and reveal a variation or sensitivity of α — beyond its static local value, already known with very high precision in terrestrial laboratories — it is imperative to resort to extreme cosmological scales, for three reasons:

- Accumulation of historical drift: the temporal or spatial variations predicted by vacuum rheological models are extremely subtle (ppm or fractional). Large distances and high z are needed for this drift to accumulate enough to be distinguishable from instrumental errors.

- Gravity and density regimes: the elastic response of the vacuum depends directly on the baryonic charge and the local gravitational field. High-density regions or non-linear gravity regimes act as amplifiers or modulators of the lattice tensions, making the sensitivity to α and its coupling with G or Ω_k measurable.

- Unique window: local laboratories fix with surgical precision the current starting point (z = 0), but the only window with the real potential to reveal whether α is dynamic is the study of the primordial universe, the cosmic background, and the kinematics of massive structures on large scales.

Vallejos, O. A. (2026). Constraint on the Fine Structure Constant at z 5 from Stacked JWST/NIRSpec Spectra. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.23373471

The Gravitational Back Door

The Moon is not merely a geological neighbor or an observation platform. It is, in the mechanics of the restricted three-body problem, an energy gateway. The Jacobi constant C_j defines zero-velocity surfaces that separate the gravitational basins of the Earth and the Moon. The Lagrange point L_1 is the topological bottleneck through which that potential can open. When a hypervelocity impact—natural or artificial—injects lunar regolith at velocities exceeding v_esc = 2.38 km/s, a fraction of that material changes its C_j and crosses the gate. What was a localized impact point becomes, over tens of hours, a kinetic rain distributed over MEO, GEO, and HEO.

The operational conclusion is uncomfortable but direct: caring for the Moon is caring for the Earth. Not out of geological romanticism, but because the Moon is the gravitational lid of Earth's potential well. Perturbing it with impacts capable of ejecting mass at high velocity is opening a back door in the orbital infrastructure on which civilization depends.

The physical framework: C_j as a topological boundary

In the restricted three-body problem, the Jacobi constant of a particle of negligible mass in the field of two massive bodies, Earth-Moon, is written:

C_j = 2Ω - v²

where Ω is the combined effective gravitational + centrifugal potential and v is the velocity in the rotating frame. The surface C_j = constant delimits the regions of space where the particle can move. When C_j exceeds the critical value at the L_1 point, the terrestrial and lunar basins become disconnected. When it equals it, a passage neck appears. When it slightly exceeds it, the gate opens.

This is not a metaphor. It is the topology of the effective potential. The L_1 point, located at 326,000 km from Earth and 58,000 km from the Moon, is the mountain pass between two gravitational valleys. A particle with the right energy can cross it; a particle with less energy bounces off the slope.

The operational question, then, is: what kind of event is capable of giving a fragment of regolith the energy necessary to cross that pass?

The physics of ejecta: from a crater to a kinetic rain

Scaling law and escape velocity

The cratering models of Melosh 1989 and Holsapple 1993 establish that the ejecta velocity distribution follows an inverse power law with distance from the impact point.

But a high-velocity impact does not excavate a crater with clean edges: it excavates an ejection cone. The fraction of material that exceeds the lunar escape velocity depends on the impact velocity and angle. For vertical impacts into dry regolith, the fraction exceeding v_esc can be estimated between 1% and 5% for low relative-velocity impacts, and between 10% and 20% for high-velocity impacts v_i > 10 km/s.

The Falcon 9 2026 case: the calibrated experiment

The impact of a Falcon 9 second stage—4,000 kg—against the lunar surface on August 5, 2026, at v = 2.43 km/s, produced a crater 18–30 m in diameter and 3.6 m deep, with ejecta rays observed by Danuri within a radius of 5–50 km.

This event validates the pi scaling law and confirms that even modest masses generate significant dispersion. But it is, deliberately, a low-energy event. It did not massively exceed the escape threshold. The C_j gate remained closed. It only puts surface lunar operations at risk.

The hypothetical Apophis-sized asteroid case, 2029

Apophis has an adopted diameter of 315 m, density = 2,600 kg/m³, and mass:

m = 43 million tons

Its encounter velocity with Earth is approx. 7.4 km/s. If it were to impact the Moon:

impact velocity = 7.8 km/s

Energy released: 310 Mt of TNT

A crater 5–8 km in diameter. An impact quake lasting >10 minutes. And, the critical point for this analysis: a non-negligible fraction of the ejecta—on the order of 10^10 to 10^11 kg—acquires velocities exceeding 2.38 km/s.

The more probable, faster 2024 YR4 case

2024 YR4 is an object 40–90 m in size, with v_infty approx. 13.5 km/s. Its lunar impact velocity would be:

v_imp = approx. 13.7 km/s

That is, 75% faster than Apophis. The energy released would be lower—6.5 Mt for a diameter of 60 m—but the ejecta velocity is proportional to the impactor velocity. A faster impact produces faster ejecta. The expelled lunar material would cross the Earth-Moon distance and the GEO ring in 18–24 hours, not 30–40.

For satellite operators, this halves the reaction time. And 2024 YR4 is representative of a population of 40–90 m asteroids that is exponentially more numerous than that of 300 m objects. There are thousands of 2024 YR4s out there that we have not cataloged.

The C_j gate: how regolith enters Earth orbit

Newtonian mechanics: the Moon as a cannon

Upon escaping the Moon at 2.4–3.0 km/s, the material does not stay still. It inherits the Moon's orbital velocity around the Earth, v_orb.L approx. 1.02 km/s. The ejection direction determines the destination:

- Retrograde ejecta opposite to the lunar orbital motion: velocity relative to Earth approx. 1.02 - 2.4 = -1.38 km/s. This material falls toward the Earth, crosses MEO and GEO orbits, and potentially enters the atmosphere.

- Prograde ejecta in the direction of motion: relative velocity approx. 1.02 + 2.4 = 3.42 km/s. This material rises to higher Earth orbits or escapes the Earth-Moon system.

Dynamics of the three-body problem: the C_j analogy

The energy of the ejecta determines its Jacobi constant. A fragment ejected just at escape velocity, without gravitational assistance, remains "stranded" on the crest of C_j. A fragment ejected with a little more velocity changes its C_j value. In doing so, its zero-velocity surface opens at the L_1 neck. The terrestrial basin and the lunar basin join. The lunar material crosses exactly through L_1 and begins to orbit the Earth.

This is what is represented in the original document's diagram as the red L_1 point: the gate. It is not a metaphorical gate. It is a topological transition in the effective potential, and it occurs on timescales of hours to days.

Transit times

For an object ejected at 2.6 km/s relative to the Moon:

t approx. = approx. 40 h

For 2024 YR4 ejecta at 5–7 km/s, the transit is reduced to 18–24 hours. For Apophis ejecta at 3–4 km/s, 30–40 hours. In both cases, the order of magnitude is tens of hours, not weeks. There is no time for a manual catalog. There is no time for a committee meeting. The shrapnel cloud is already in orbit.

Consequences: the collapse of MEO and GEO

The "grenade effect"

A lunar impact is not a localized event. It is a grenade:

- Primary impact: one point on the Moon.

- Shrapnel cloud: millions of particles in spherical expansion.

- Secondary risk: each satellite in MEO/GEO has a small cross section, but the cloud density is enormous. A 1 mm regolith particle at 2–3 km/s has the kinetic energy of a high-caliber rifle bullet. A 10 cm rock is equivalent to a TNT explosion.

The 3-month scenario

At 90 days after impact:

- Migration and chaotic orbits: the larger material that neither re-entered nor impacted the Moon redistributes into transient elliptical orbits. Submillimeter dust is pushed by solar radiation pressure and solar wind, forming a diffuse cloud similar to a miniature comet tail.

- Collapse of GEO and MEO: continuous bombardment by microimpacts at 2–4 km/s punctures, depressurizes, or structurally destroys most active and inactive satellites. A massive cloud of secondary space debris is generated: an accelerated Kessler effect on an extreme scale.

- Shield effect and optical climate: a fraction of the fine dust captured by Earth's gravitational well slowly precipitates into the upper atmosphere, generating a diffuse meteor shower and an increase in the night sky's background brightness.

What it is not designed for

No current catalog—Space-Track, ESA, or any operational system—is designed to track 10 million new fragments in 48 hours. Current planetary defense infrastructure assumes one object, one trajectory, one decision. The C_j scenario produces a swarm: millions of trajectories, zero possible decisions in the available time.

The Moon as a strategic asset: why protecting it is protecting the Earth

The Moon as a detection platform

A MIR/IR telescope in a lunar PSR responds directly to the systemic failure exposed by the "Green Lantern" 2015 bolide published on this blog, Chelyabinsk 2013, and the 2026 JH2 flyby. The latter, an object 32–71 m in size, passed at 0.25 lunar distances—96,000 km—traveling at 20 km/s, and was discovered only 8 days before its closest approach, after emerging from the solar blind zone.

The Moon has a strategic observational and rapid-response advantage for this type of risk, since it has a fraction of the escape velocity—one-sixth.

The Moon as a launch platform

The fundamental advantage of a lunar defense platform:

- From Earth's surface: 12.5–13.5 km/s.

- From the lunar surface: 2.9–3.4 km/s, factor 4.

Applying the Tsiolkovsky equation with I_sp = 350 s, the mass ratio drops from e^13,000/3,434 approx. 44 Earth to e^3,200/3,434 approx. 2.5 Moon. From the Moon, most of the launched mass is useful impact mass, not propellant.

The Moon as a witness plate

The lunar surface is an almost intact geological record of the first few hundred million years of the solar system. An impact like those in the examples would be recorded seismically across the entire Moon, validating its use as a calibrated detector of the impactor flux. The Moon not only protects us: it teaches us.

Conclusion: the back door and the responsibility

The Jacobi constant C_j is not a mathematical artifice. It is the topological boundary that separates two gravitational basins. The L_1 point is the gate. Lunar regolith ejected at high velocity is the key.

A hypervelocity impact on the Moon—natural or artificial—does not only destroy scientific and cultural heritage. It opens the back door of Earth's potential well and injects a kinetic rain into the orbits where critical navigation, telecommunications, and defense constellations operate. The transit time is tens of hours. The reaction time is zero. Of course, this depends on the location, impact angle, and velocity.

The conclusion is as plain as it is forceful:

Caring for the Moon is caring for the Earth.

Not because the Moon is sacred, but because it is the gravitational lid of the system. Perturbing it with impacts capable of ejecting mass at >2.38 km/s is opening a door we cannot close. Planetary defense is not only about deflecting asteroids. It is about preserving the dynamic integrity of the Earth-Moon system as critical infrastructure.

References

1. Melosh, H. J. 1989. Impact Cratering: A Geologic Process. Oxford University Press.

2. Holsapple, K. A. 1993. The scaling of impact processes in planetary sciences. Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences, 21, 333–373.

3. Carrier, W. D., Olhoeft, G. R., & Mendell, W. 1991. Physical properties of the lunar surface. Lunar Sourcebook. Cambridge University Press.

4. Wieczorek, M. A. et al. 2013. The Crust of the Moon as Observed by GRAIL. Science, 339, 671–675.

5. NASA/JPL CNEOS 2026. Small-Body Database: 99942 Apophis; encounter of 04-13-2029.

6. arXiv:2607.14625 2026. Observational planning for the 2026 August 5 Falcon 9 upper stage lunar impact.

7. The Korea Herald 2026. S. Korea's Danuri captures rare images of SpaceX rocket crashing.

8. Vallejos, O. A. 2015, updated 2023. Report "Green Lantern": bolide of July 30, 2015 over Argentina and Uruguay.

9. National Research Council 2010. Defending Planet Earth: Near-Earth Object Surveys and Hazard Mitigation Strategies. National Academies Press.

10. Paige, D. A. et al. 2010. Diviner Lunar Radiometer Observations of Cold Traps in the Moon's South Polar Region. Science, 330, 479–482.

Ad Astra Workshop

The Community Science (Ad ASTRA) Workshop is organized by Caltech/IPAC, the NASA Astrophysics Division, and the three Astrophysics Program Offices (Physics of the Cosmos, Cosmic Origins, and Exoplanet Exploration), in conjunction with the ASTRA initiative, to engage the community in defining future large, strategic astrophysics missions. Structured over three thematic days—Science, Capabilities, and Missions—the workshop provides a comprehensive framework to connect scientific priorities with technological readiness and mission implementation. Across all three days, plenaries, panels, breakout sessions, and poster contributions are designed to maximize community input. The outcomes of the workshop will help NASA prioritize mission concepts and shape a balanced, forward-looking astrophysics portfolio.

I'm going to make a summary of Concepts and Missions...

The documents present an ambitious and multifaceted vision for astrophysics in the coming decades, ranging from the study of the origins of the universe to the search for life beyond our solar system. The missions and concepts can be grouped into several key thematic areas:

1. Cosmology and the Early Universe:

   Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB) Missions: A recurring theme is the proposal of a state-of-the-art space observatory. Its main objective would be to measure primordial gravitational waves by searching for the B-mode in order to test cosmic inflation beyond the discussion of how they are measured and what is measured, in addition to providing definitive measurements of the mass of neutrinos—which neutrinos we are looking for and where they originate—and the optical depth to reionization.

   Exploration of the Dark Ages: Several concepts, such as radio telescopes on the far side of the Moon, focus on observing the 21 cm signal from neutral hydrogen at high redshifts z > 30. This is the only way to probe the "Dark Ages" of the universe, before the formation of the first stars, and offers a testing ground for physics beyond the standard model—dark matter, inflation, etc.

   Spectroscopic Surveys of Galaxies: Missions such as a 2-meter space telescope with multi-object spectroscopy in the near- and mid-infrared. Its goal is to map the large-scale structure of the universe with unprecedented precision, studying dark energy, inflation, and neutrino mass through baryon acoustic oscillations. It is presented as a bridge between current surveys (DESI) and future ones (Euclid, Roman).

2. High-Energy Phenomena and the Extreme Universe:

   Next-Generation X-ray Missions: There is a strong commitment to X-ray observatories with enhanced capabilities. These include:

       Successors to Chandra: Concepts offering a 10x improvement in sensitivity and 50x in survey speed, with angular resolution of ~1 arcsecond, to study black hole formation, AGN feedback, and the impact on exoplanets.

       Broadband Observatories: Missions to cover the 0.1 to 100 keV range, in order to study the spin of supermassive black holes, accretion growth, and resolve the cosmic X-ray background at its energy peak of ~30 keV, where most obscured AGN emit.

       X-ray Interferometry: Concepts seeking a quantum leap in angular resolution—microarcseconds—which would allow resolving black hole coronae, studying AGN binaries in their final stages, and observing the impact of stellar flares on exoplanet habitability.

   Closing the "MeV Gap": Missions are proposed to explore the MeV energy range, a poorly observed window. Concepts that seek to detect nuclear emission lines from supernovae, study positron physics, and capture counterparts of multi-messenger events.

   Cosmology and Particle Physics: Missions for ultra-high-energy cosmic rays and very-high-energy neutrinos, others for MeV gamma rays and the search for dark matter antinuclei, and missions to measure low-energy cosmic antinuclei seek answers to fundamental questions about dark matter, particle acceleration, and nucleosynthetic processes.

3. Planets and the Origin of Life:

   Characterization of Exoplanets: Multiple approaches compete to characterize exoplanet atmospheres, especially temperate and rocky ones.

       Direct Imaging Missions: A ~40m inflatable telescope and a constellation of 4m telescopes are innovative concepts for obtaining biosignature spectra from planets around M dwarfs. proposes a hybrid between a space-based starshade and extremely large ground-based telescopes to achieve unprecedented contrast and high observation speed.

       Transit and Eclipse Missions focus on transit spectroscopy. A dedicated survey to find Earth-sized planets in the habitable zone of M dwarfs.

       Non-Transit-Based Technique: Proposes using the "Planetary Infrared Excess" (PIE) technique to characterize the thermal emission of rocky planets that do not transit, which would greatly expand the number of studyable targets.

       Infrared and Nulling Interferometry: Concepts such as mid-infrared nulling, based on the European concept, would seek to characterize planets detected by radial velocity.

   Magnetospheres and Habitability: The detection of magnetic fields on exoplanets is considered crucial for assessing their habitability. Low-frequency radio missions on the far side of the Moon could detect auroral radio emissions from Earth-like exoplanets and M dwarfs, providing the first direct measurement of their magnetospheres.

4. New Technologies and Architectures:

   Enabling Technologies: Advances are highlighted in detectors, X-ray optics (state-of-the-art silicon mirrors), CADR cooling, integrated photonic optics for interferometry, and quantum technologies (atomic clocks, atom interferometers).

   Mission Architectures:

       Missions on the Moon: The Moon emerges as a strategic destination for astrophysics, offering a radio-quiet, cold, and stable environment for low-frequency radio telescopes, infrared telescopes, and even gravitational wave detectors.

       Constellations and Distributed Architectures: Concepts that propose fleets of smaller, coordinated spacecraft instead of a single large observatory. This offers advantages such as redundancy, the ability to conduct multiple simultaneous observations, scalability, and lower cost per mission.

       Deep Space Missions: Solar Gravitational Lens Observatory and Interplanetary Laser are concepts for missions in the outer solar system, which would leverage the Sun's gravity or large distances to perform unparalleled fundamental physics and astrophysics measurements.

       Fluidic Optics: Which would drastically reduce the mass and cost of future space telescopes.

To wrap things up, I've wanted to participate in an event for a long time to share my ideas and to read what the scientific community is discussing. It was a complete success for the organizers and NASA.

Link: 

https://conference.ipac.caltech.edu/community2026

https://science.nasa.gov/astrophysics/programs/physics-of-the-cosmos/community/ad-astra/

 

Point of No Return: Micro Black Holes

 Can Science Create a Black Hole in the Lab? The Surprising Prediction of a New Model of the Universe

Imagine for a moment that space wasn't that boring, empty nothingness we usually picture. What if the cosmic vacuum were actually a kind of invisible crystal, a perfectly ordered grid holding everything together? This is the central idea of a bold new theoretical model called VCV48, and it doesn't just change our idea of the universe: it also draws a very clear red line for particle physics and predicts something incredible—the possibility of creating a mini black hole in a lab… but only if we cross a very specific limit.

Today, we're going to explore this "Point of No Return" in a way everyone can understand. Get ready for a journey into the heart of matter, where the safety of our experiments and the fate of energy are decided in a cosmic dance.

 1. The Universe is a Crystal: The VCV48 Hypothesis

To understand the end of the story, we first have to introduce the protagonist: the VCV48 model (Vitrum Cosmicum Vacui, or "Cosmic Vacuum Glass"). This model proposes that space-time isn't a continuous rubber sheet, but a rigid crystalline grid with a specific symmetry, like the molecular structure of a diamond or quartz.

So, what are black holes in this model? They aren't monsters that spring from nothing, but the result of a "topological collapse": a kind of jam or catastrophic failure in this cosmic crystal. But here's the crucial part: this crystal doesn't collapse from just any amount of energy. It has a defense mechanism.

 2. The Protective Shield: Topological Braking (Or How the Vacuum Protects Itself)

When we smash particles together at enormous speeds in an accelerator like the Large Hadron Collider (LHC), we're injecting a brutal amount of energy into a minuscule point in this spatial crystal.

Like a safety net, the vacuum has its own emergency cooling system: Topological Bremsstrahlung (or T-Brem). Think of it as a mechanism that dissipates excess energy, like a car braking and converting motion into heat that vanishes into the air. If the impact is small, the vacuum evacuates almost all the energy and recovers without a problem. It's safe.

 3. The Point of No Return: The Red Line at 350 TeV

The big question is: how much energy is too much? The VCV48 model makes an astonishingly precise prediction. It calculates a critical energy threshold from its fundamental parameters (basically the "mass" of the crystal's building blocks and its stiffness).

The result is a clear number: Ec ≈ 350 TeV (teraelectronvolts) at the center of the collision.

- Below 350 TeV: The topological braking mechanism works. The energy dissipates, the crystal vibrates but doesn't break. This is a completely safe zone.

- Above 350 TeV: The cooling system saturates. The injected energy is so staggering that the crystal grid can't evacuate it in time. A jam is inevitable, and the crystal collapses in on itself. At that instant, according to the model, a micro-black hole would form.

This threshold is the "Topological Point of No Return."

 4. Are We in Danger? The Collider Safety Traffic Light

This is the million-dollar question. To answer it, the model defines a "Safety Factor (S)" , which compares the critical limit to the energy that actually gets trapped in the grid. If S is greater than 1, we're safe. If it's less than 1, collapse.

Let's look at the results for our most powerful machines:

| Collider | Collision Energy | Safety Factor (S) | Status |

| :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- |

| LHC (current) | 13.6 TeV | ~648 | ULTRA-SAFE |

| FCC (future) | 100 TeV | ~23.3 | SAFE |

| Hypothetical | 350 TeV | ~2.1 | CAUTION |

| Hypothetical | 600 TeV | ~0.97 | COLLAPSE |

Breathe easy! The current LHC has an enormous safety margin, over 600 times below the threshold. Even the Future Circular Collider (FCC), planned for 100 TeV, would be perfectly safe with a margin of 23 times. As additional comfort, the energy retained in the LHC is a mere 0.544 TeV (a cosmic sigh) compared to the 350 TeV needed for the apocalypse.

 5. The Smoking Gun: How Would We "See" This Theory at the LHC?

A theory that can't be tested isn't science; it's philosophy. And the VCV48 model hits the nail on the head by proposing a very concrete experimental signature: missing energy.

When topological braking occurs, the evacuated energy doesn't turn into particles we can see. It simply vanishes from our detectors, absorbed by the vacuum itself. This would create an imbalance in our experiments: an excess of events where a precise amount of energy seems to have disappeared into thin air.

According to the calculations, in current LHC collisions, this "ghost" energy would form a spectrum reaching a maximum of about 544 GeV. Finding a peak of events with that signature would be irrefutable proof of the model.

The bad news: the probability of this happening is minuscule. The model itself predicts we would need far more data than we currently have. So, for the moment, the fact that we haven't seen it is perfectly normal and doesn't refute the theory.

 Conclusion: A Window into the Future of Physics

The VCV48 model offers us a radically new and strangely reassuring vision. It tells us that our current experiments are profoundly safe under this framework, but it also draws a technological and ethical frontier for the distant future: an accelerator exceeding 600 TeV would be playing, quite literally, with cosmic fire.

Beyond safety, this theory is a marvel of falsifiability. That is, it's so concrete and specific that science has the power to prove it right or wrong. The data collected in the coming decades at the High-Luminosity LHC will be the final judge. If the predicted missing energy signature isn't found, the VCV48 model will become history. If it is found… we will be facing a revolution in our understanding of the universe.

The search continues, and the vacuum crystal still holds its secrets. 

Vallejos, O. A. (2026). Preprint: Topological Point of No Return in Hadron Colliders: Implications for the LHC, the HL-LHC, and the FCC. (Version Annex IV). Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.21779829

https://github.com/OAVallejos/VCV48

50 años aportando!

 No importa el frío o el calor… No importa el estado de ánimo ni los problemas que tengan. A cualquier hora, cualquier día, en cualquier lugar te vas a cruzar con un runner… 

El atletismo en esta región es una comunidad feliz compartiendo desafíos mutuos.  

El pasado mes de junio tuvimos un gran evento. 

La convocatoria fue un homenaje más a la trayectoria de Alcides “Locomotora” Soto y de paso a una gran familia que lo apoya. Vamos por la tercera generación de este apellido corriendo y entrenando a otros atletas…

Alcides va apenas por los 50 años contribuyendo a este hermoso deporte, el “running”... 

Un aporte de corazón, una marca registrada de perseverancia, tenacidad y logros grupales. 

Un deportista no se forma de la noche a la mañana. Además de voluntad se necesita de una organización atrás. Gente fiscalizando, preparando kids, buscando auspicio, comerciantes con visión de país. 

Los logros de este entorno están en crecimiento. Y pasamos a ver cómo representamos los colores celeste y blanco en el extranjero. 

Por nombrar el caso de la profesora de educación física Marisol Tozzi quien se coronó doble campeona sudamericana en el XVII Campeonato Sudamericano Máster de Atletismo en Chile. Obtuvo dos medallas de oro en las pruebas de 1500 y 5000 metros llanos en pista. Marisol es integrante del grupo de Locomotora Running donde el profe es Alcides y participa del circuito de carreras de la Asociación Reconquistense de Atletismo (ARA). 

Reconquista es sede deportiva en su plazas, calles y paseos aeróbicos. La participación es regional. Contamos con atletas de Villa Ocampo, Las Toscas, Guadalupe Norte, Avellaneda, Malabrigo entre otras localidades… Y a su vez esas ciudades cuentan con fechas deportivas incluidas en el calendario personal de cada atleta que disfruta de la cordialidad y la camaradería cuando sale a competir.  

Mis felicitaciones y toda mi gratitud por ser inspiración y ejemplo de buenos principios. Toda una tradición que identifica una sociedad norteña en esta provincia. Sin dejar de lado el futuro, vamos a estar atentos de las nuevas generaciones que se están gestando en el núcleo duro de nuestras instituciones deportivas.