Skip to content

notes(#635/#660): the #635 identity against the wrapping-type tables - #662

Draft
LightChainr wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
notes/635-identity-20260908
Draft

notes(#635/#660): the #635 identity against the wrapping-type tables#662
LightChainr wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
notes/635-identity-20260908

Conversation

@LightChainr

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

Write-up deliverable for #660 (parent #650). One new file: notes/issue-635-identity-20260908.md. No new census; consumes the unmerged artifacts of PR #646, #653, #657, #654, #645.

The five deliverable bullets

  1. Sector labels — the probe635: M(p) as both-same sector difference — exact at finite L (verdict A, degenerate sectors); #628 bond rank defect fixed #646 5-name labels (none/x/y/both-same/both-two, combinatorial on finite-L configurations via cluster displacement lattices) mapped onto the Repair #632 bond laboratory; wrapping-type census L=3,4 (#640) #653 coarse 4×4 (neither/dir0/dir1/both, which folds both-same and both-two into both) and onto Mertens–Ziff cross vs spiral (via the PR Retrieval: torus wrapping probabilities vs the matching function (#642) #654 identification: the repository's x=either difference equals the cross difference by MZ (20)).
  2. Candidate identity, written so it can faila_k = #(black ∈ both-same, k) − #(white ∈ both-same, k); acceptance gate is the committed axis L=3 Bernstein integers, re-run this session and reproduced bit-for-bit: [-1,-9,-36,-78,-90,-36,36,36,9,1] (scripts/exact_matching_polynomial.py --geometry axis --L 3). The two amplitude rows sum to the reference exactly (PR probe635: M(p) as both-same sector difference — exact at finite L (verdict A, degenerate sectors); #628 bond rank defect fixed #646 script re-run); M(1/2) = −21/64, u_c = 43/128 re-confirmed by Fraction arithmetic.
  3. Verdict A at finite L (wrapping-form) on every size reached: axis L=3,4,5; diamond L=2,3,4. Not B (no finite-L defect exists to exhibit), not C (MZ 2016 proves the wrapping-form at every finite L).
  4. What axis L=5 / diamond L=4 changed — degeneracy caveat upgraded to A-continues (both-two mass 0 at every k on 2²⁵ and 2³²; coarse 4×4 still the five MZ cells) — and what they cannot change: the Jacobsen map (PR notes(#637): retrieval — what is published on sector crossings vs our matching identity #645), which is an m→∞-first eigenvalue statement about one pTL operator, not reachable by more enumeration; the crux (matching-lattice content vs open/closed sectors of one operator) is stated as the open gap.
  5. [P1 reserve] Source-visible topology and all-width closure beyond the completed width-four laboratory #636 not funded — the wrapping-form of A is published (MZ 2016); the unpublished piece is the sector identification, and degeneracy, if exact, would make sector machinery carry less structure than its cost. Recommendation recorded in the note only, not as a STATUS promotion.

Boundaries

Related: #635, #637, #640, #642, #646, #651, #653, #654, #657, #660.

Verdict A at finite L (wrapping-form, Mertens-Ziff 2016), degenerate
both-same sectors; L=3 Bernstein tripwire reproduced bit-for-bit this
session. Axis L=5 / diamond L=4: A-continues, both-two mass 0. Jacobsen
map gap stated (order of limits, one-operator vs two-lattices, novelty
boundary). Does not fund #636. No STATUS.md edit; no ticket closed.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner Author

Verification comment, not a merge request.

The L=3 Bernstein gate and the A / A-continues / not-#636 boundary are in good shape.

Please keep this distinction explicit in a follow-up commit if you touch the note: both-same as rank-2 (cross) vs both-same as coarse both (cross ∪ spiral). The 685360 both-same × both-same configs at axis L=5 are the spiral pairing; they are why the difference Δ#(both-same) can still equal collapsed D even though not every both-same event is a cross. Ticket stays open.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

[P1 long-horizon] Is M(p) the difference of two topological sector amplitudes? Prove or kill the map before anyone builds a transfer matrix

1 participant