trailAharonov-Bohm phases of test quarks around superfluid vortices distinguish Higgs from confining regimes
Topological order or vortex statistics sharply distinguish the color-flavor-locked phase from superfluid hadronic matter
Anyonic vortex statistics as order parameter· for
Test quarks acquire fractional Aharonov-Bohm phases around superfluid vortices in the Higgs regime
atomic
Refined line-operator observable· for
The phase of a vortex-line operator linking an electric Wilson line distinguishes Higgs from confining regimes
shared · shown elsewhere
Continuity from superfluid dressing· against
The physically meaningful Aharonov-Bohm phase of a test quark in a superfluid is that of the dressed charge
In a superfluid, physical test-quark states are unavoidably dressed by the gapless superfluid mode
Physical distinctions between phases must be detectable by measurements on finite-energy physical states
◌
◌
⇄
In a 2+1D lattice gauge theory with fundamental scalars, the phase of a vortex-line correlator linking a Wilson line changes non-analytically between Higgs and confining regimes
Aharonov-Bohm phases of dressed quark quasiparticles interpolate smoothly between Higgs and confining regimes
atomic
claim · empirical · derivedA factual claim that rests on inference from other evidence rather than direct observation.constitution →claim page ↗︎
Aharonov-Bohm phases of test quarks around superfluid vortices distinguish Higgs from confining regimes
⇄ContestedCredible evidence or argument exists on multiple sides.constitution →credence 0.35Credence, from 0 to 1: the Steward's probability that the claim, as stated, is true. Stated only where a single number is an honest summary; normative and evaluative claims usually carry none.constitution →
1depended on by
this rests on ↓
claimA box is a claim: a single proposition the graph assesses, with its own page and map. Click any claim to centre the map on it.constitution →argumentA pill is an argument: one line of reasoning stating how the claims beneath it combine to bear on the claim above it, for or against. Arguments are not destinations; click their claims to explore.constitution →✓verifiedThe claim traces to reliable primary sources through a clear chain of evidence.constitution →↑supportedEvidence favors the claim, but the chain is incomplete or the sources are secondary.constitution →⇄contestedCredible evidence or argument exists on multiple sides.constitution →○unsupportedNo credible evidence found, though the claim is not contradicted.constitution →✕contradictedAvailable evidence weighs against the claim.constitution →?unknownInsufficient information to assess.constitution →◌unassessedNo current assessment. Attention goes where its expected value is highest and someone funds it; nothing has funded an assessment of this claim yet, and anyone can.constitution →verified factopen questionvalue premisetheoremprizeA double ring marks a claim with a live prize: an amount in owls offered for a machine-checked proof or disproof of its published formal statement. The amount is in the preview and on the claim page; a prize changes nothing about how the claim is assessed or how important it is judged to be.prize rules →⊢machine-checked⊢ marks a claim whose published formal statement has a machine-checked proof or disproof. The checker confirms the proof; the verdict beside it is still the steward's judgment of the claim as worded.prize rules →supportsthis provides evidence for the parentsteward instructions →contradictsthis argues against the parentsteward instructions →assumesbackground the parent's framing takes as givensteward instructions →requiresa load-bearing premise: the parent is false without itsteward instructions →Fig. Detail falls off with distance; every claim is an address.