# Measurement Blind Spots — 1 November 2026

300 hypotheses about what experimental science fails to see; 30 developed in
detail; three investigated with working mathematics.

**No experiment was performed.** Every result is analytical or computational.
Nothing in this bundle is a new measurement, and nothing should be cited as
evidence that a proposed effect was observed.

## Open this first

`Blind-Spots.pdf` — 112 pages, A4, typeset for reading.

## What is inside

| File | What it is |
|---|---|
| `Blind-Spots.pdf` | The full document |
| `Blind-Spots.docx` | The same text in Word |
| `hypotheses_300.csv` / `.json` | 300 hypotheses, one row each, seven required fields |
| `00-START-HERE.md` | Overview, statistics, and where to begin |
| `CORRECTIONS.md` | Corrections, negative results, superseded claims |
| `METHODOLOGY.md` | How it was built, the readiness and novelty scales, the limits |
| `sources.csv` | 17 external sources with verified identifiers and HTTP status |
| `investigations/` | Three investigations: Python code, data, results |
| `figs/` | The five figures |

## The three investigations

All reproducible offline with numpy/scipy/matplotlib; seeds are fixed.

| Script | Result |
|---|---|
| `I1_offset_window_bias.py` | A decay exponent fitted over a finite window is α·⟨logistic⟩; the bias is exactly ½ at the crossover and the offset is recoverable from curvature (Cramér–Rao included) |
| `I2_boundary_bias.py` | κ_app/κ = 1/[e^λE₁(λ)], λ = Gs²/(2κd); for λ ≫ 1 the reported conductivity stops depending on the material and becomes Gs²/(2d) |
| `I3_kk_blindspot.py` | A Kramers–Kronig-consistent impedance spectrum is not evidence of linearity: R_ct falls to 0.64 at 100 mV while the spectrum stays a Debye to 1e-7 |
| `R1_refinement_numbers.py` | Every number quoted in the 30 refined hypotheses |

```bash
python3 investigations/I1_offset_window_bias.py
python3 investigations/I2_boundary_bias.py
python3 investigations/I3_kk_blindspot.py
python3 investigations/R1_refinement_numbers.py
```

## Two things worth reading first

- **I2** predicts a signature that is checkable against published data with no
  new experiment: reported in-plane thermal conductivity should scale as the
  square of the laser spot radius in the large-spot limit.
- **R04 / `CORRECTIONS.md` §2** is a hypothesis that failed its own
  quantitative check. The stray-light explanation for OD600 growth-curve
  compression is quantitatively insufficient below OD 1.5. The claim was
  narrowed and the negative result kept.

Compiled 1 November 2026.