BU16 Falsifiability, Admissibility, and Standing under Single-Universe Boundary Consistency

Abstract This paper develops Falsifiability, Admissibility, and Standing under Single-Universe Boundary Consistency as a methodological clarification of what can, and cannot, count against the B_U framework. Its central claim is that B_U is neither an unfalsifiable shield nor a loose metaphysical slogan. Rather, it is a high-threshold total-boundary claim: it stands or falls according to whether global boundary consistency can be preserved across the total admissible domain U. Within this framework, falsification does not mean local anomaly, model breakdown, or failed replication. It means the discovery, within the same domain, of a stable, repeatable, and irreducible boundary regime that cannot be absorbed into local conditions, resolution shifts, effective-theory limits, or matching failure. The paper then distinguishes four strata often confused in scientific practice: experimental failure, model failure, admissibility failure, and standing failure. This separation is crucial. Local failure does not automatically propagate upward into universe-level boundary failure. The result is a sharper criterion for theory evaluation: many disputes that appear to threaten global structure are in fact low-level breakdowns or methodological overextensions. At the same time, the framework remains genuinely vulnerable in principle: if another irreducible boundary standing were found within the same total domain, this would not be a minor anomaly but the discovery of another universe-sample regime. The paper therefore recasts falsifiability as a structured boundary test rather than a reflexive response to local difficulty.