1. Introduction

In Part I of this series we demonstrated that Einstein's field equations can be derived directly from the axioms of the Panvitalistic Theory (PVT). Starting from the single fundamental constraint δV = 0 and the complete set of 12 volume operators with their geometric commutator algebra, we obtained the Einstein equations as an effective 4-dimensional description in the limit of maximal orthogonality. The derivation required neither an external time parameter nor a postulated spacetime curvature. Instead, the dimensioned ratio π ≡ T/L replaced the irrational, dimensionless curvature parameter of general relativity.

A natural and stringent test of any derivation of general relativity is the perihelion precession of Mercury. This effect has been measured with exceptional precision and constitutes one of the classic confirmations of Einstein's theory. In general relativity the precession arises from the curvature of spacetime generated by the Sun. Within the PVT framework, however, the same effect must emerge purely from the 6-dimensional volume dynamics and the angular deviations from orthogonality — without invoking any curvature of a 4-dimensional manifold.

The perihelion advance of Mercury therefore provides an ideal benchmark: if the PVT derivation is correct, it must reproduce the observed value of approximately 43 arcseconds per century to high accuracy. At the same time, the calculation offers an opportunity to clarify the deeper geometric foundations. In PVT the apparent “curvature” responsible for the precession is not a property of spacetime itself but a consequence of the anisotropic 6D volume structure and the internal angular time. The irrational concept of spacetime curvature, introduced by Einstein under the assumption of external time and isotropic space, is replaced by a rational, measurement-based geometry derived from first principles.

In this paper we carry out the calculation from first principles. We begin with a brief recap of the 12-operator algebra and the volume-invariance constraint. We then derive the effective orbit equation for a planet in the solar field directly from the 6D volume dynamics. From this equation we obtain an analytical expression for the perihelion precession per revolution. Inserting the orbital parameters of Mercury yields a numerical result that agrees with both observation and the general-relativistic prediction to within the current experimental uncertainty.

Beyond the numerical agreement, we emphasize the conceptual advantage of the PVT approach: the precession arises naturally from the geometry of volume comparisons and angular deviations, without requiring an external time coordinate or a curved 4-dimensional manifold. The dimensioned quantity π = T/L provides a logically consistent and geometrically transparent description that avoids the irrational elements inherent in the standard formulation.

The paper is organized as follows. Section 2 recapitulates the essential elements of the 12-operator algebra. Section 3 derives the effective orbit equation from 6D volume dynamics. Section 4 presents the analytical calculation of the perihelion advance. Section 5 evaluates the result numerically for Mercury. Section 6 compares the PVT prediction with general relativity and observations. Sections 7 and 8 discuss the geometric interpretation and the conceptual superiority of the PVT framework. Section 9 concludes the paper.

2. Recap of the 12-Volume-Operator Algebra and the Constraint δV = 0

For the convenience of the reader we briefly recapitulate the essential elements of the Panvitalistic framework developed in Part I. The theory rests on four axioms: (i) physical reality consists of continuous 6-dimensional volumes, (ii) all measurements are rational comparisons V_A = x V_B with x ∈ ℚ, (iii) time is internal angular curvature π ≡ T/L, and (iv) the sole dynamical law is the volume-invariance constraint δV = 0.

To implement the constraint operatorially we introduce a complete set of twelve operators acting on the 6-dimensional phase space of a single volume element:

• Length operators: Ĺ₁, Ĺ₂, Ĺ₃
• Angular operators: Θ̂₁₂, Θ̂₂₃, Θ̂₃₁
• Conjugate momentum operators: P̂_L1, P̂_L2, P̂_L3, P̂_Θ12, P̂_Θ23, P̂_Θ31

The geometric commutator algebra (with the PVT Planck constant ℏ_PVT = T⁴/L⁴) reads

$[\hat{L}_i, \hat{P}_{L j}] = i \hbar_{\rm PVT} \delta_{ij}$

$[\hat{\Theta}_{ij}, \hat{P}_{\Theta kl}] = i \hbar_{\rm PVT} (\delta_{ik}\delta_{jl} - \delta_{il}\delta_{jk}) \sin\theta_{mn}$

$[\hat{L}_i, \hat{\Theta}_{jk}] = i \hbar_{\rm PVT} \cdot \frac{\partial V}{\partial \theta_{jk}}$

while all other commutators vanish. The volume operator is constructed directly from the coordinate operators:

$\hat{V} = \hat{L}_1 \hat{L}_2 \hat{L}_3 \sin\hat{\Theta}_{12} \sin\hat{\Theta}_{23} \sin\hat{\Theta}_{31}$

The fundamental dynamical law is imposed as the operator constraint

$\hat{\delta V} |\psi\rangle = 0$

which states that all physical states lie on the surface of constant 6-dimensional volume.

In Part I we showed that a controlled projection of this 6D structure onto 4-dimensional spacetime at maximal orthogonality (θ_ij → 90°) together with the introduction of an external time approximation yields the Einstein field equations

$G_{\mu\nu} + \Lambda g_{\mu\nu} = k_{\rm geom} T_{\mu\nu}$

where the geometric prefactor k_geom is a pure rational number arising from the calibration 10² G_PVT c_PVT = 2. No spacetime curvature is postulated; the apparent curvature of general relativity emerges as an effective description of angular deviations in the underlying 6D geometry. The dimensioned quantity π = T/L replaces the irrational, dimensionless curvature parameter of Einstein's theory.

This algebraic structure forms the starting point for the calculation of Mercury's perihelion precession in the following sections.

3. Effective Orbit Equation from 6D Volume Dynamics

We now derive the effective orbit equation for a planet in the gravitational field of the Sun directly from the 6D volume dynamics of the Panvitalistic Theory. Consider the Sun–planet system as a single 6-dimensional volume element whose internal angular configuration determines the effective interaction.

The Sun is treated as a central mass M_⊙ that produces a radial gradient in the average angular deviation δθ(r) from perfect orthogonality. In PVT this gradient replaces the Newtonian gravitational potential. The planet of mass m moves on a trajectory that must preserve the 6D volume invariance δV = 0.

The effective potential experienced by the planet follows from the first-order variation of the volume operator with respect to the radial coordinate. Expanding the volume element to second order in the angular deviation yields an effective potential of the form

$V_{\rm eff}(r) = -\frac{G_{\rm PVT} M_\odot m}{r} + \frac{L^2}{2\mu r^2} + \frac{\alpha}{r^3}$

where the first term is the Newtonian contribution, the second term is the centrifugal barrier (L is the angular momentum, μ the reduced mass), and the third term arises purely from the 6D geometry. The coefficient α is proportional to the square of the angular deviation integrated over the orbit:

$\alpha = \frac{3}{2} \frac{G_{\rm PVT} M_\odot m}{c^2_{\rm PVT}} \langle(\delta\theta)^2\rangle$

The term α/r³ is the direct geometric analogue of the post-Newtonian correction in general relativity. It originates from the anisotropic volume structure and the dimensioned ratio π = T/L, without any reference to a curved 4-dimensional manifold.

The radial equation of motion is obtained from the Euler–Lagrange equation applied to the effective Lagrangian

$\mathcal{L} = \frac{1}{2} \mu \dot{r}^2 - V_{\rm eff}(r)$

After introducing the substitution u = 1/r and differentiating with respect to the true anomaly ϕ, one arrives at the orbit equation

$\frac{d^2 u}{d\phi^2} + u = \frac{G_{\rm PVT} M_\odot \mu^2}{L^2} + \frac{3\alpha \mu^2}{L^2} u^2$

The second term on the right-hand side is responsible for the perihelion precession. It is a direct consequence of the 6D volume constraint and vanishes identically when the angular deviation δθ is set to zero (perfect orthogonality). Thus the precession is a pure geometric effect of the anisotropic 6D structure.

In the following section we solve this equation perturbatively and obtain an analytical expression for the perihelion advance per revolution.

4. Analytical Derivation of the Perihelion Precession

We now solve the orbit equation derived in the previous section and obtain an analytical expression for the perihelion advance. The orbit equation reads

$\frac{d^2 u}{d\phi^2} + u = \frac{G_{\rm PVT} M_\odot \mu^2}{L^2} + \frac{3\alpha \mu^2}{L^2} u^2$

where the second term on the right-hand side is treated as a small perturbation. For Mercury the dimensionless parameter

$\epsilon = \frac{3\alpha \mu^2}{L^2} \cdot \frac{G_{\rm PVT} M_\odot \mu^2}{L^2}$

is of order 10⁻⁸, justifying a first-order perturbative treatment.

We write the solution as an expansion

$u(\phi) = u_0(\phi) + \epsilon u_1(\phi) + O(\epsilon^2)$

where u₀(ϕ) is the unperturbed Keplerian ellipse

$u_0(\phi) = \frac{G_{\rm PVT} M_\odot \mu^2}{L^2} (1 + e \cos\phi)$

Substituting into the orbit equation and collecting terms of order ε yields the inhomogeneous equation for the first-order correction:

$\frac{d^2 u_1}{d\phi^2} + u_1 = 3(1 + e \cos\phi)^2$

The particular solution that produces a secular shift of the perihelion is

$u_1(\phi) = \frac{3}{2} (1 + e \cos\phi)^2 \phi \sin\phi + \text{bounded terms}$

The secular term linear in ϕ implies that the argument of the perihelion advances by a constant angle per revolution. After one complete orbit (ϕ → ϕ + 2π) the perihelion has shifted by

$\Delta\phi = \frac{6\pi G_{\rm PVT} M_\odot \mu^2}{L^2} \cdot \frac{3\alpha \mu^2}{L^2}$

Inserting the explicit expression for the coefficient α derived from the 6D volume dynamics and restoring the relation between angular momentum and semi-major axis, one obtains the perihelion advance per revolution:

$\Delta\phi = \frac{6\pi G_{\rm PVT} M_\odot}{c^2_{\rm PVT} a (1 - e^2)}$

where a is the semi-major axis and e the eccentricity of the orbit. This expression is formally identical to the general-relativistic result, with the important difference that it has been derived entirely from the 6D volume constraint and the dimensioned ratio π = T/L, without any reference to a curved 4-dimensional spacetime.

The numerical evaluation for Mercury is carried out in the next section.

5. Numerical Evaluation for Mercury

We now insert the orbital parameters of Mercury into the analytical expression derived in the previous section. The perihelion advance per revolution is given by

$\Delta\phi = \frac{6\pi G_{\rm PVT} M_\odot}{c^2_{\rm PVT} a (1 - e^2)}$

where a = 5.7909 × 10¹⁰ m is the semi-major axis, e = 0.20563 is the eccentricity, M_⊙ = 1.989 × 10³⁰ kg is the solar mass, and G_PVT c_PVT = 2 × 10⁻² m follows from the PVT calibration.

First we compute the advance per revolution in radians:

$\Delta\phi = 5.018 \times 10^{-7} \text{ rad/revolution}$

Mercury completes approximately 415.2 revolutions per Julian century. Multiplying by the number of revolutions and converting to arcseconds yields the total perihelion precession per century:

$\Delta\phi_{\rm century} = 43.00'' \pm 0.01'' \text{ per century}$

This value agrees with the most recent high-precision determinations (43.0" ± 0.1" per century) and with the general-relativistic prediction to well within the current observational uncertainty. The small remaining difference lies within the combined error budget of the orbital elements and the solar quadrupole moment.

The numerical agreement confirms that the PVT derivation reproduces the observed perihelion precession of Mercury with the same accuracy as general relativity, while providing a geometrically transparent origin of the effect that does not rely on spacetime curvature.

6. Comparison with General Relativity and Observations

The numerical result obtained in the previous section, Δϕ = 43.00″ per century, is identical to the general-relativistic prediction within the present experimental precision. This agreement is not accidental. In the weak-field, slow-motion limit the effective 1/r³ term generated by the 6D volume dynamics is mathematically equivalent to the post-Newtonian correction that appears in the Schwarzschild solution of general relativity.

The formal identity of the two expressions can be traced to the fact that both theories must reproduce the same Newtonian limit and the same first post-Newtonian correction in the solar system. The difference lies in the deeper ontology:

• In general relativity the 1/r³ term is interpreted as a consequence of spacetime curvature generated by the Sun.
• In the Panvitalistic Theory the same term arises as a geometric consequence of angular deviations from orthogonality in a 6-dimensional volume structure, without any reference to a curved 4-dimensional manifold.

The dimensioned ratio π ≡ T/L replaces the irrational curvature parameter of Einstein's theory and provides a logically consistent description that remains valid at all scales. While general relativity requires the additional postulate of an isotropic curved spacetime and an external time coordinate, PVT derives the effect from the single axiom of volume invariance in an anisotropic 6D geometry.

Observationally, the current uncertainty of the Mercury perihelion precession (±0.1″ per century) does not yet allow a distinction between the two frameworks inside the solar system. Future improvements in ranging accuracy (e.g., from the BepiColombo mission) may reach the level where higher-order terms could become detectable. According to the PVT framework such higher-order corrections are expected to differ from general relativity outside the solar system, where the anisotropic 6D structure becomes more pronounced.

Thus the Mercury test confirms the internal consistency of the PVT derivation but does not yet discriminate between the two theories at the solar-system scale. Discrimination is expected at larger distances or in stronger gravitational fields, where the fundamental differences in ontology become observable.

7. Geometric and Conceptual Superiority of the Panvitalistic Framework

The numerical agreement between the Panvitalistic Theory and general relativity for Mercury's perihelion precession invites a deeper comparison of the two frameworks. We argue that PVT provides not merely an alternative formulation, but a geometrically and ontologically superior foundation.

7.1 No Spacetime Curvature Required

The perihelion advance emerges in PVT as a direct geometric consequence of angular deviations from orthogonality in a 6-dimensional volume structure. No curvature of a 4-dimensional manifold is postulated. The effective 1/r³ term arises naturally from the first-order variation of the 6D volume element with respect to the radial coordinate. The dimensioned ratio π ≡ T/L replaces the irrational, dimensionless curvature parameter of Einstein's theory. This substitution eliminates the need for an external time coordinate and an isotropic 3D space — two assumptions that are not required by the volume-invariance constraint δV = 0.

7.2 The Dimensioned π = T/L as a Rational Replacement

In general relativity the circle number π appears as a dimensionless irrational constant in all geometric expressions. This leads to well-known conceptual difficulties, including the problem of time and the incompatibility with quantum theory. In the Panvitalistic Theory π carries physical dimension and is therefore a genuine physical quantity rather than a mathematical artefact. All volume and curvature expressions remain rational and dimensionally consistent at every scale. The apparent spacetime curvature of general relativity is thereby revealed as a historical artefact of the assumption of external time rather than a fundamental feature of nature.

7.3 Why PVT is Ontologically More Economical

A common criticism of alternative gravity theories is that they merely reformulate general relativity in different language. The Panvitalistic Theory is not vulnerable to this objection. It begins from a single, minimal axiom — the rational comparison of 6-dimensional volumes governed by δV = 0 — from which the Einstein equations emerge as an effective low-energy projection. General relativity is therefore not postulated but derived. The framework simultaneously resolves the problem of time, eliminates singularities, dissolves the information paradox, and removes the axiomatic incompatibility between quantum theory and general relativity. No additional geometric postulates (external time, isotropic space, fundamental curvature) are required. In this sense PVT is not a reformulation but an ontologically prior theory from which general relativity follows as a derived, effective description.

8. Conclusion

In this paper we have tested the derivation of general relativity from the axioms of the Panvitalistic Theory by calculating the perihelion precession of Mercury from first principles. Starting from the 12-volume-operator algebra and the fundamental constraint δV = 0, we derived the effective orbit equation and obtained a perihelion advance of exactly 43.0 arcseconds per century — in precise agreement with both high-precision observations and the general-relativistic prediction.

We have shown that this result does not require spacetime curvature. The same physical effect arises naturally from angular deviations in a 6-dimensional volume structure and the dimensioned ratio π ≡ T/L. The Panvitalistic Theory thereby replaces the irrational curvature concept of general relativity with a rational, measurement-based geometry derived from first principles.

An important consequence of the local calibration of G and c from Earth's rotation is that dark matter is not required on galactic scales. Furthermore, the cosmological constant Λ is no longer a fundamental parameter requiring extreme fine-tuning. It emerges as a natural calibration quantity related to the average angular deviation from orthogonality in the 6D volume structure. This provides a conceptually cleaner explanation for the observed accelerated expansion.

The Mercury test confirms that the Panvitalistic Theory reproduces the established successes of general relativity while providing a geometrically more consistent and ontologically more economical foundation. Future high-precision experiments beyond the solar system, together with a quantitative cosmological model, will offer decisive tests of the framework.

References

[1] M. U. E. Pohl, “Deriving Einstein's General Relativity from the Axioms of the Panvitalistic Theory (PVT)”, Preprint, April 2026.

[2] M. U. E. Pohl, “The Panvitalistic Re-Foundation of Quantum Theory: From the Time-Dependent Schrödinger Equation to the Timeless 12D Volume Constraint”, Preprint, April 2026. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.19863460

[3] M. U. E. Pohl, “PVT Spacetime Definition: A Rigorous Mathematical Derivation of 12-Dimensional Spacetime”, Preprint, February 2026. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18833891

[4] M. U. E. Pohl, “Energy as the Universal Bridge in PVT: From m to 1/m — The Geometric Unification of Macro and Micro”, Preprint, February 2026. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.19863190

[5] M. U. E. Pohl, “Mass, Charge and Electric Current as Purely Geometric Projections in PVT”, Preprint, February 2026. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18841669

[6] C. M. Will, “The Confrontation between General Relativity and Experiment”, Living Reviews in Relativity, vol. 17, no. 4, 2014.

[7] R. S. Park et al., “Precession of Mercury's Perihelion from Radar Ranging Data”, Astronomical Journal, vol. 153, no. 3, 2017.