What abstraction patterns successfully decouple exotic physics from software design without losing domain accuracy?

This is a thoughtful question, but it sits at the boundary of what this archive covers. The preprints provided address abstraction in *quantum computing software engineering* and *AI-assisted physics reasoning*, not abstraction patterns for exotic physics domains (relativity, propulsion, field theory) themselves.

That said, the closest relevant insight comes from the quantum software hierarchy work:

A successful abstraction pattern separates *hardware details* from *algorithm intent* through layered programming models [AG-2024.05-2326]. The key is that each layer—from physical qubits up through variational algorithms—maps cleanly onto the next without forcing domain experts to constantly drop into low-level implementation details. When you solve the eigenvalue problem two different ways (variationally with error mitigation vs. via phase estimation), the *same high-level problem statement* works across both, even though the underlying physics and error-handling strategies differ radically [AG-2024.05-2326].

For more exotic physics (string theory, QFT, collider phenomenology), the emerging pattern is *language-driven agent systems with a unified execution backend* [AG-2026.03-1475]. Scientists describe their intent in natural language and standard notation; a reasoning layer translates that into domain-agnostic workflows; a decoupled backend executes calculations across multiple specialized tools without requiring package-specific code [AG-2026.03-1475]. This preserves accuracy because the agent layer understands the physics constraints, while the backend remains tool-agnostic.

However, none of these preprints directly analyze how to decouple *exotic physics theory* (say, warp metrics or novel propulsion) from software design while maintaining fidelity—that's not really their focus.