Search for a command to run...
Standard biology already recognizes gravity sensing in multiple forms: vertebrate vestibular systems detect gravito-inertial input through otolith organs, plants respond through statolith-based gravitropism, and many cell types exhibit gravity-sensitive mechanotransduction via Piezo1, YAP/TAZ, and the actin cytoskeleton. Therefore, the decisive question is no longer whether life senses gravity at all, but whether there exists a residual ultra-low-frequency synchronization response that remains after known mechanosensory pathways are accounted for. We propose the Bio-SYNC Protocol, a falsifiable, protocol-first framework designed to test this possibility. The core question is: Does phase-locked biological synchrony remain as a residual after subtraction, suppression, or regression of known mechanotransduction pathways? Within the YAGC framework — motivated by the synchronization-mesh concept (V113) and the distance-dependent synchronization relaxation time τ_c ∝ √R (V114) — we hypothesize that extremely long-wavelength synchronization fluctuations may couple to spatially distributed biological networks as weak coherent phase modulation. This leads to three quantitative expectations: (1) lock-in sensitivity scales with system size as S ∝ L^α with prior range 0 < α ≤ 1; (2) a connectivity threshold p_c exists below which synchrony collapses; (3) microgravity-induced memory effects obey a hysteresis timescale τ_hyst ∝ L^β (β > 0), interpreted through the No-Disposal Principle. The protocol is implemented in a safe-escalation design: Phase 0 (natural gravimetric lock-in), Phase 1 (artificial modulation with sham control, mechanosensor suppression, scaling, and stochastic-resonance testing), and Phase 2 (microgravity hysteresis). A Bio-SYNC-positive result requires simultaneous fulfillment of four conditions: phase-locking at preregistered frequencies, disappearance under sham, persistence after environmental covariate regression, and residual synchrony after suppression of known mechanosensors. Appendix D provides a literature map reclassifying existing studies across chronobiology, gravisensing, mechanobiology, vestibular science, and microgravity physiology into historical precursors, candidate systems, near-precedents, and null controls — showing where V120 attaches to existing work and where the real untested gaps remain. V120 is submitted not as evidence of a discovered biological gravity receiver, but as a falsifiable protocol that defines how such a claim must fail or survive.