Your summary is philosophically accurate and well-structured regarding Heidegger’s concept of Sorge (care) and its connection to Befindlichkeit (disposedness/attunement), moods (Stimmungen), and the sociality of Mitsein (being-with-others). However, your question—whether there is empirical evidence for these claims—needs to be unpacked carefully, because Heidegger’s philosophy is phenomenological and ontological, not empirical in the natural-scientific sense.

That said, some empirical and interdisciplinary fields have taken up Heideggerian insights and tested or echoed aspects of them, particularly in:

---

1. Affective Neuroscience & Psychology

• Moods as world-disclosing: Contemporary affective neuroscience (e.g., Antonio Damasio, Lisa Feldman Barrett) supports the notion that emotions and moods shape perception, meaning-making, and orientation to the world — not just inner states but relational and embodied ways of being, much like Heidegger's Befindlichkeit.

• Embodied affectivity: Studies in embodied cognition show that feelings are not merely private, but structured by bodily states, environment, and cultural context, resonating with Heidegger’s idea that moods are how “the world shows up” as meaningful.

---

2. Phenomenological Psychiatry & Psychopathology

• Scholars like Thomas Fuchs, Matthew Ratcliffe, and Louis Sass have drawn directly on Heidegger to explain phenomena like:

  • Depression as a collapse of temporal projection (loss of future-directed Sorge).

  • Anxiety as an ontological disclosure of the nothing (Angst).

  • Schizophrenia as a breakdown of attunement to the shared world.

Their work uses clinical interviews, first-person accounts, and neuropsychiatric case studies to give empirical heft to Heideggerian insights.

---

3. Sociology & Cultural Theory

• The idea that moods are not merely private but have a public and cultural dimension has been taken up by thinkers like Sara Ahmed and Brian Massumi. They build on Heidegger (and Deleuze) to explore “affective atmospheres” or “structures of feeling” (cf. Raymond Williams).

• Empirical studies in social psychology and media studies have shown that mood contagion, collective anxiety, or cultural despair can be tracked through language, behavior, political affect, etc.

---

4. Cognitive Science & Predictive Processing

• Karl Friston’s predictive coding models (and those of Andy Clark and others) suggest that humans are constantly anticipating their environment and acting based on expectations and affective valence.

• This maps closely onto Heidegger’s idea of care as being-ahead-of-oneself, where existence is always oriented toward possibility, threat, or resolution.

• Affective forecasting research also confirms that mood shapes not just response but anticipation, lending support to Heidegger’s temporal model of care.

---

Caveats:

• Heidegger’s claims about Sorge are not hypotheses that can be “proven” or falsified in a lab.

• However, empirical fields are increasingly converging on similar descriptions of human subjectivity, temporality, affectivity, and relationality — validating aspects of his framework indirectly.

• The idea of moods being co-constituted socially is well-supported across sociology, affect theory, and some strands of affective neuroscience.

---

In Summary:

There is no direct empirical “proof” of Heidegger’s ontological claims (e.g. “care is the being of Dasein”), but:

• Neuroscience, psychopathology, cognitive science, and social theory offer empirical and quasi-empirical support for many of Heidegger’s key insights:

  • Moods are foundational and world-disclosing.

  • Human existence is future-oriented and embedded in care.

  • Affective states are both individual and socially shared.

  • Temporal breakdowns (e.g. in depression or trauma) mirror disruptions in Sorge.

So while not “empirical evidence” in the positivist sense, these fields substantiate Heidegger’s ontology with experiential and measurable correlates.