Repository navigation
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Summary
Scoped proof with exact finite corroboration: no real or complex Gram line system attains the even-window Lagrangian cap at any
h=2k >= 6.This answers Matarener's PR5282, open question 1: saturation
v=8Tath=6andv=16Tath=8is impossible. The contract isrank_F2 A=2kand1 in col Afor the nonorthogonality adjacency. The proof also covers the stronger affine symplectic label contract with additional orthogonalities.The new equality argument forces
E_p+E_(p+w)=2^(2-k) Ifor orthogonal projections. Positivity contradicts this scalar being smaller than one. The prior cap and label reduction belong to DreamingOfClouds's PR2244; PR5282 supplies the explicit question and historical screen. Neither predecessor's construction nor invoice is audited or replayed. The new obstruction, written proof and standalone exact verifier were produced by Nick Petalas.Package:
research/even-window-saturation-gap. Cardcomplex-new-helper-inventory, scope changed to the explicit line-system equality question. No new kappa or selected-frontier change.Evidence
Before: the source question left the two saturated even windows open. After:
PROOF.mdexcludes saturation uniformly for everyk>=3.The verifier independently enumerates affine generators by RREF and checks every complementary-label elimination certificate. At
k=2,3,4it enumerates respectively 12, 120 and 2160 affine generators, with 4, 16 and 64 pair certificates, forcing scalars 1, 1/2 and 1/4. Thek=2complementary-projection control survives. Thirty exact scalar instances and nine malformed-certificate/dimension cases pass their required checks. These finite checks corroborate the new elimination step; the all-k claim rests on the written proof.From the repository root:
All pass locally. Direct normal and optimized checks took 0.480 and 0.481 seconds, below their 120-second registered limits, and their generated source-bound receipts agree. The package runner reports
PASS_REGISTERED_RESEARCH_PACKAGE; publication checks reportPASS_RESEARCH_COMMIT_BYTESfor all eight package/input files and confirm the declared base is an ancestor of the publication commit. Syntax inspection and warnings-as-errors pass. CPython 3.12 and the standard library suffice; another machine may substitute its Python 3.12 path.Limitations
The integer gap of one does not establish an optimal density gap independent of T, or exclude ratios approaching
2^k. Arbitrary pairings and non-Gram decoders are outside scope. No native word, dirty restoration, complete current signed invoice, compiler admission or complete multiplication theorem is supplied. The selected frontier and five framework assumptions remain unchanged. Independent human and formal proof-kernel review are unclaimed; Lean, Docker and historical supplier suites were not run.Open next questions
v/Tsupremum at h=6 or h=8. Start with positive semidefinite deficits in the affine basis equations; a quantitative deficit estimate is missing.Related open work
The account's open PRs created since the advance CLAIM were refreshed after CI. No additional PR on even-window line-system saturation was found. Related decoder and Gram context is:
No shared numerical quantity is computed by this result, so no numerical agreement or disagreement is asserted. The question source PR5282 and line-count predecessor PR2244 are merged archival work.
CI notes
Both hosted checks passed at
4280ef185156ac701d6b84c21ec57a182066611d:planandreplay (research/even-window-saturation-gap). Run 41066904694 completed successfully at the matching head. The completed checks were read once, and run metadata separately confirmed the head and conclusion. Both registered commands also passed locally. CI certifies the registered finite replay and package controls; it is not independent human or proof-kernel review of the all-k written proof.Merge Danger
Door: two-way. Blast radius: isolated. Only the new six-file research package is added; shared code and the selected frontier are unchanged.