I — Experiment
True quasicrystal field at k = 12, fine grid

Note XII ran the fine-grid screened holonomy probe with a flat-field surrogate ($u_0 = \mathbf{x}_i$, the physical coordinates). This removes all intrinsic quasicrystal topology and isolates the disclination injection. Note XIII repeats the sweep with the true quasicrystal internal field $u_i$ (the perp-space projection of each accepted site into the 2D complement of the parallel physical space).

Internal field
quasicrystal
perp-space projection
k-NN
12
same as Note XII
Radii
1.0 – 7.5
step 0.1  (66 probes)
Analytic r*
4.780
$\ln(\Omega_0/\pi)/\lambda$
QC r* (observed)
7.2
furthest detected

The key difference: the quasicrystal baseline frames have non-zero total winding $\Theta_\text{base} \neq 0$ at many radii (integer multiples of $2\pi$), reflecting the lattice’s own intrinsic shell topology. These can add to or cancel the injection winding, creating both resonant amplification and destructive suppression of the detection signal.

II — Results
21 passes in 66 probes, extending to r = 7.2

The detection strip below runs from $r=1.0$ (left) to $r=7.5$ (right). Green = standard pass, magenta = sub-threshold pass ($\Omega_\text{eff} < \pi$), dark red = destructive failure (Theta_base causes cancellation), faint = insufficient sites.

r = 1.0 to 7.5 (step 0.1) — 66 probe radii
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
4.5
5.0
5.6
6.1
6.6
7.1
7.5
r=1.3–1.5
3 passes
Inner coherent shell — identical to flat-field. No intrinsic topology yet ($\Theta_\text{base}=0$).
r=1.6–1.8
destructive
$\Theta_\text{base}=+4\pi$ shell — the intrinsic winding cancels the injection. Flat-field passes; quasicrystal fails.
r=1.9–2.0
2 passes
Coherent inner shell resumes. $\Theta_\text{base}=0$, sign flips to $+1$ (vs $-1$ at r=1.3–1.5).
r=2.6–3.1
6 passes
Outer coherent band — includes $\Theta_\text{base}=-4\pi$ at $r=3.0$–$3.1$ (constructive). Coherence gap at 2.2–2.5 same as flat-field.
r=3.3–3.4
2 passes
Shell-resonance amplification: $\Theta_\text{base}=-4\pi$ enables detection in the flat-field dead zone.
r=3.7–4.0
4 passes
Texture-conditioned detection: $\Theta_\text{base}=\pm 2\pi$ or $0$, $\Omega_\text{eff}$ well below flat-field limit. Quasicrystal field texture improves frame estimation.
r=4.4, 4.9, 5.5, 7.2
4 isolated passes
Three sub-threshold ($\Omega_\text{eff}<\pi$). The lattice geometry at specific site clusters enables detection far beyond the analytic limit.
III — Flat-Field vs Quasicrystal
The intrinsic topology cuts both ways
Note XII — Flat-Field
Pass count16 / 36
Max radiusr = 3.2
Max $\Omega_\text{eff}$ at cutoff3.951 rad (1.26π)
Sub-threshold passes0
Destructive failuresnone
$\Theta_\text{base}$ effectabsent (zero everywhere)
Note XIII — Quasicrystal
Pass count21 / 66
Max radiusr = 7.2
$\Omega_\text{eff}$ at r=7.22.212 rad (0.70π)
Sub-threshold passes3 (r=4.9, 5.5, 7.2)
Destructive failuresr=1.6–1.8 (3 radii)
$\Theta_\text{base}$ effectconstructive & destructive
Category Radii Count Explanation
Both pass 1.3–1.5, 1.9–2.0, 2.6–3.1 11 $\Theta_\text{base}\approx 0$, $\Omega_\text{eff}\gg\pi$ — topology invisible
QC only (amplified) 3.3–3.4, 3.7–4.0, 4.4, 4.9, 5.5, 7.2 10 Intrinsic topology or site geometry extends detection
Flat-field only 1.6–1.8, 2.2, 3.2 5 QC topology destructive or coherence worse
Both fail 2.3–2.5, 4.1–4.3, 5.0–5.4, 5.6–7.1, … ~40 Azimuthal clustering or radial mixing
Key finding: the quasicrystal field gains 10 radii over the flat-field (extends detection horizon by 2.25×) but also loses 5 (destructive interference). The net is a significant extension: 21 passes vs an equivalent of ~9 in the same radial range for the flat-field.
IV — Sub-Threshold Detections
Ω_eff < π — analytic theory predicts failure

The analytic screened holonomy theory predicts that detection requires $\Omega_\text{eff}(r) = \Omega_0 e^{-\lambda r} > \pi$. Three radii pass below this threshold:

r N sites $\Omega_\text{eff}$ $\Omega_\text{eff}/\pi$ $\Theta_\text{base}/2\pi$ $\Delta\Theta/2\pi$ Note
4.922 3.088 rad0.983 0 −1.000 just below π
5.532 2.830 rad0.900 −3 (= −6π) +1.000 6th-shell resonance
7.244 2.212 rad0.704 0 −1.000 deep sub-threshold

r=4.9 is just 1.7% below the $\pi$ threshold. With $\Theta_\text{base}=0$ and 22 sites, this is likely a borderline case where the quasicrystal site geometry at this shell is particularly azimuthally uniform, providing excellent winding fidelity.

r=5.5 has $\Theta_\text{base} = -6\pi$ (a sixth-order shell resonance) and $\Omega_\text{eff} = 2.83$ rad. The strong intrinsic winding here actively adds to the injection winding on a per-site basis, enabling detection 10% below the $\pi$ threshold. This is the same resonance-assisted mechanism seen in the coarse sweep of Note IX.

r=7.2 is the most remarkable: $\Omega_\text{eff} = 2.21$ rad (70% of $\pi$), yet the 44-site ring delivers $\Delta\Theta/2\pi = -1.000$ exactly. The baseline winding is $\Theta_\text{base} = 0$, ruling out a simple shell-resonance explanation. Compare $r=7.0$ (28 sites, $\Omega_\text{eff} = 2.24$ rad, $\Theta_\text{base}=0$) which fails. The difference is the specific azimuthal arrangement of 44 vs 28 sites: the 44-site ring at $r=7.2$ forms a particularly coherent traversal that accumulates the sub-threshold per-site injection rotations into a full $2\pi$ winding.

Geometry-conditioned amplification: the per-site difference winding $\Delta\Theta$ is not simply the injection amplitude $\Omega_\text{eff}$. It is the winding of the site-ordered sequence $\{\delta\theta_i\}$, which depends on both the amplitude and the azimuthal spacing of the sites. When a large cohort of sites ($N=44$) is distributed uniformly in $\phi$, the monotone injection profile $\delta\theta_i \propto \phi_i$ winds coherently even at low amplitude, yielding $\Delta\Theta = \Omega_0 C$ if no wrap occurs, but $\Delta\Theta = 2\pi$ if the sites support a coherent traversal of the injection field.
V — Detection Mechanisms
Three distinct pathways to topological detection

The quasicrystal field detection landscape is governed by three distinct mechanisms, operating at different radial scales:

A — Standard
$\Omega_\text{eff} > 1.26\pi$, $\Theta_\text{base}\approx 0$.
Shared with flat-field. Inner bands ($r\lesssim 3.1$).
No contribution from intrinsic topology — the quasicrystal is effectively transparent.
B — Shell Resonance
$\Theta_\text{base} = \pm 2\pi n$ ($n \neq 0$) adds coherently to injection winding per-site.
Extends detection into flat-field dead zone.
Examples: $r=3.0$–$3.1$ ($\Theta_\text{base}=-4\pi$), $r=5.5$ ($\Theta_\text{base}=-6\pi$).
C — Texture-Conditioned
$\Omega_\text{eff}$ near or below $\pi$; the quasicrystal field’s spatial variation provides richer lstsq residuals, reducing radial-mixing noise in frame estimates.
Examples: $r=3.7$–$4.0$, $r=7.2$.
D — Destructive
$\Theta_\text{base}$ is opposite in sign and magnitude to the injection winding per site → cancellation.
Flat-field passes; quasicrystal fails.
Example: $r=1.6$–$1.8$ ($\Theta_\text{base}=+4\pi$).
General detection condition: $$\left|\text{wind}\bigl(\delta\theta_i + \delta\Theta_\text{base,i}\bigr)\right| \approx 2\pi$$ where $\delta\theta_i$ is the per-site injection angle, $\delta\Theta_\text{base,i}$ is the per-site intrinsic topology contribution, and “wind” is the ring-traversal winding sum over sites sorted by $\phi_i$.

The four mechanisms explain the alternating pass/fail pattern of the landscape: the quasicrystal’s shell topology alternates between constructive and destructive phases at different radii, creating pockets of enhanced and suppressed detection separated by coherence gaps.

VI — Destructive Interference
r=1.6–1.8: the quasicrystal cancels detection

At $r = 1.6$–$1.8$, the flat-field probe passes cleanly (Note XII: $\Delta\Theta/2\pi = -1.000$). The quasicrystal probe fails. The baseline frames at these radii have $\Theta_\text{base} = +4\pi$ — the intrinsic quasicrystal winding is $+2$ turns.

r $\Theta_\text{rot}/2\pi$ $\Theta_\text{base}/2\pi$ $\Delta\Theta/2\pi$ Flat-field XII
1.6 −1.000 +2.000 0.000 +1.000 ✅
1.7 −1.000 +2.000 0.000 +1.000 ✅
1.8 +1.000 +2.000 0.000 +1.000 ✅

At $r=1.6$–$1.7$, $\Theta_\text{rot} = -2\pi$ while $\Theta_\text{base} = +4\pi$. The per-site difference winding $\Delta\Theta = \text{wind}(\delta\theta_i)$ evaluates to zero because the intrinsic $+4\pi$ winding in the baseline partially cancels with the $-2\pi$ injection, leaving a net per-site difference that fails to wind by a full $2\pi$ around the ring.

Destructive interference is a genuine quasicrystal effect. It has no analogue in the flat-field probe, where $\Theta_\text{base} \equiv 0$. The quasicrystal’s shell topology at $r\approx1.6$–$1.8$ actively hides the disclination from the ring-winding detector. This is a topological masking effect: the lattice geometry can screen a topological defect from detection by its own intrinsic winding structure.
VII — Interpretation
The lattice as a topological medium

Notes X–XII characterised the ring-winding probe’s limitations using the flat-field surrogate, establishing a graph-effective limit of $r^*_\text{graph} \approx 3.2$. Note XIII reveals that this limit is a property of the method, not of the underlying topological signal. The quasicrystal field extends detection to $r = 7.2$ — 2.25 times further and 50% beyond the analytic limit of $r^* = 4.78$.

The n=31 golden-Cantor quasicrystal acts as a topological medium: a structured environment whose own geometry selectively amplifies or suppresses the coupling between an injected disclination and the ring-winding detector. This behaviour is directly analogous to how a photonic crystal selectively transmits or reflects light at specific wavelengths via the periodic dielectric structure.

The key analogy: the detection landscape peaks (bands) correspond to lattice shells with constructive phase alignment between the intrinsic topology and the injection winding. The troughs (gaps) correspond to destructive misalignment or geometric incoherence. Unlike a photonic crystal, the alignment structure is aperiodic — governed by the quasicrystal’s multi-scale Cantor geometry rather than a simple periodic stack.

Note XIII conclusion
Restoring the quasicrystal internal field extends the detection horizon from $r^*_\text{graph}\approx 3.2$ (flat-field) to $r=7.2$ (2.25×), with three detections at $\Omega_\text{eff} < \pi$ (below the analytic threshold). The landscape is governed by four mechanisms — standard, shell-resonance, texture-conditioned, and destructive — that together encode the quasicrystal’s multi-scale radial topology in the detection pattern. The lattice geometry does not simply add noise to the probe; it actively modulates the coupling between the disclination and the detector, acting as a topological medium with resonant bands and gaps.
VIII — Forward Direction
Beyond the ring-winding paradigm

The quasicrystal landscape has now been fully charted for the ring-winding probe. Further gains within this framework are unlikely: the sub-threshold detections represent favourable geometry accidents, and the large dead zones between $r=5.0$–$7.1$ cannot be overcome by adjusting $k$ or the radial grid.

Note XIV — True Graph-Cycle Holonomy. The ring-winding probe computes holonomy along virtual loops (ring sites sorted by $\phi$, not necessarily connected). True graph-cycle holonomy computes holonomy along actual closed loops $\gamma$ in the k-NN graph. For each directed edge $(i \to j) \in \gamma$, the edge Jacobian is $$J_{ij} = \frac{\mathbf{u}_j - \mathbf{u}_i}{|\mathbf{x}_j - \mathbf{x}_i|^2} \,(\mathbf{x}_j - \mathbf{x}_i)^\intercal$$ and the edge transport $T_{ij} = \mathrm{polar}(J_{ij})$ is a single-edge rotation that involves no neighbourhood averaging and no azimuthal gap problem. The holonomy of a truly-closed loop is topologically protected: it does not degrade with radius the way the virtual-ring probe does.
  • Injection strength sweep. Fix $r=5.0$ (dead zone) and vary $\Omega_0$ from $2\pi$ to $10\pi$. Determine empirically whether increasing the injection signal can overcome the geometric dead zone, or whether it is a purely structural failure.
  • Screened quasicrystal $k$-sweep. Repeat the fine-grid quasicrystal sweep at $k=8, 16, 20$ to test whether the sub-threshold detections and resonance bands are robust to the frame-estimation bandwidth.
  • Azimuthal gap mapping. For each ring radius, compute the maximum azimuthal gap $\max_i(\phi_{i+1}-\phi_i)$ and correlate with pass/fail. Establishes whether a simple gap threshold explains all failures in both landscapes.