Yang–Mills theory

Structural Challenge

This response is paired with its canonical Structural Challenge: Yang–Mills theory (P102) in the Physics Structural Challenge Ledger.

τ response

Evidence route

This response is supported by 15 canonical registry items in the τ Corpus.

• III.D94 — YM Mass Gap Persistence direct problem account confidence: high
• III.T27 — Yang-Mills Gap Theorem formalization support confidence: high
• IV.D169 — Strong configuration space bridge structure confidence: high
• IV.D170 — Strong connection assignment formalization support confidence: medium
• IV.D171 — Strong curvature formalization support confidence: medium
• IV.D172 — Plaquette-aggregated strong defect formalization support confidence: medium
• IV.D173 — Canonical strong vacuum, plaquette form bridge structure confidence: medium
• IV.D174 — Strong quadratic form formalization support confidence: medium
• IV.D175 — Spectral gap at stage~n formalization support confidence: medium
• IV.D176 — YM sector coupling bridge structure confidence: medium
• IV.D177 — Gap quantum direct problem account confidence: medium
• IV.D179 — Orthodox Bridge Conjecture boundary or nonclaim confidence: medium
• IV.D579 — Yang--Mills on tau3 formalization support confidence: medium
• IV.P103 — Equivalence of defect formulations direct problem account confidence: medium
• IV.P106 — Gap mode coherence direct problem account confidence: medium

Notes

Verification

• Verification routeformal_proof_checking
• Verification statuspending_external_review
• External statusexternally_open

External-review boundary

External physics review of the τ formulation, comparison against orthodox treatments of foundational principles, and adjudication of bridge-to-standard-form claims.

Provenance

• v1 predecessorphys-yangmills-theory (promoted one to one)
• v1 mapping recovered fromf534b3fb^

Status disclaimer

A Challenge Response reports the program's current internal stance against a canonical Structural Challenge. It does not imply external verification, scientific consensus, philosophical settlement, or final proof. Read it together with its evidence route, registry references, verification status, and external-review boundary.