Expositions · Premise notes · PRM-001

PRM-001 · Neutral signature

What a premise note is. Each note takes one registered premise — a postulate, an adopted premise, a measured input, a convention, a loaded correspondence, a fence or an open requirement — and shows every place the sealed suite invokes it, with a verbatim quote and its role there (stated, load-bearing, conditional, mentioned, discharged), the Registrar claims that rest on it, and what the suite itself says fails without it. The notes were drafted by the ChatGPT drafting lane (A1634, dispatch D1288) and verified by the house: every quote was checked against the suite source at its line. A claim→premise link is declared only after the house has read the passage (R76), and it remains an editorial house judgment. Under R78 an edge is declared only where the record's result ASSUMES the premise; a record that is merely about a premise is shown on its note, not as a dependency. The drafting lane saw at most twelve passages per premise; the house read every remaining hit in the full suite TeX and added those passages to the notes, marked as house additions. Where the PI corrected the register row (R81), the note says at the top what changed; the lane's text below it quotes the row the lane was given. Two notes — PRM-025 and PRM-026, for the premises R81 registered — were drafted wholly by the house, from a census of every line of the suite that names them. A note explains a premise; it never promotes or demotes one.

PRM-002 →

Premise

\emph{We adopt} a sign-convention-neutral fibre: placing both conventions on equal footing inside a single composition algebra \emph{motivates} an inner product of signature $(1,3)+(3,1)=(4,4)$.

Paper 0 · Neutral-signature premise · PDF p.15 · p0_framework_foundations.tex:791.

What kind of premise this is

The register calls this ADOPTED_PREMISE. Paper 0 calls the neutral signature a model choice and an adopted premise, not a derivation. It motivates treating both Lorentz-sign conventions in one fibre; it does not deduce that choice from the physical equivalence of conventions. Paper 1 uses the same qualified step in its carrier-selection discussion. No retirement test for the convention-neutral choice is supplied. Source status words: adopted premise, not a derivation. (p0_framework_foundations.tex:797).

Where the suite invokes it

Located invocations in the read excerpts, not an exhaustive full-source-tree census. Pages refer to saved Rev32.7 page-delimited text, not PDF-image authentication.

#	locator	quote (verbatim, ≤ 30 words)	role	argument
1	`p0_framework_foundations.tex:791` Paper 0 · Neutral-signature premise · PDF p.15	`\emph{We adopt} a sign-convention-neutral fibre`	STATED	Convention-neutral fibre
2	`p1_peirce_gauge_group.tex:57` Paper 1 · Why `J_3(\mathbb O_s)`? · PDF p.24	`placing both conventions on equal footing in a single composition algebra \emph{motivates} a neutral $(4,4)$ norm`	CONDITIONAL	Neutral-norm step in the carrier chain
3	`p0_framework_foundations.tex:798` Paper 0 · Neutral-signature premise · PDF p.16	`The equivalence of the two conventions does \emph{not} by itself require an algebra carrying both at once`	MENTIONED	Necessity limitation
4	`p1_peirce_gauge_group.tex:43` Paper 1 · Abstract · PDF p.23	`\emph{under the added requirement} of an eight-dimensional real normed composition algebra this selects the split octonion algebra $\mathbb O_s$`	CONDITIONAL	Conditional composition-algebra selection

Arguments that rest on it

NO RECORD — neutral-norm step in the carrier chain, p1_peirce_gauge_group.tex:57. The step invokes the adopted simultaneous treatment of conventions. No carrying record is identified in the supplied candidate set; an actionable ADD is therefore not submitted. The same argument is summarized in the abstract at p1_peirce_gauge_group.tex:43.

What breaks without it

The source limits necessity rather than asserting a failure of rival theories: p0_framework_foundations.tex:799–801 says either convention alone remains consistent and the premise buys neutrality, not necessity. NOT ASSESSED — removal of this choice is not followed through the carrier chain in the supplied print. The abstract’s selection also expressly requires the eight-dimensional real normed-composition condition; no omission test for that combined condition is supplied.

Registrar sync

Registrar state after R76, R78 and R82 (S327j, master 0e1418ad6501767d). Declared today: none (UNKNOWN, not INDEPENDENT). The lane's lines below describe the master as it was supplied to the lane (d0aa26db154ff43f), before these changes.

Declared today in the supplied material, Registrar master d0aa26db154ff43f: none (UNKNOWN, not INDEPENDENT). Draft dispositions — no ADD, CONFIRM or DISPUTE row; there is no declared edge to adjudicate. Unbound NO RECORD arguments are not graph ADDs. No candidate record is supplied. This is unknown mapping coverage, not evidence that every result is independent of the premise.

Tier and what this does not show

A premise is not a result, and invocation count is not importance. An ADD remains a proposal until house verification under R76; a DISPUTE goes to the PI. No record or premise is upgraded, downgraded, or edited. Unlocated dependencies remain unknown.

Sources

TeX: p0_framework_foundations.tex:791; p0_framework_foundations.tex:797; p0_framework_foundations.tex:798; p0_framework_foundations.tex:799–801; p1_peirce_gauge_group.tex:43; p1_peirce_gauge_group.tex:57. Registrar: no carrying record identified in the supplied material. Premise: PRM-001.

PRM-002 →

Built by scripts/premise_notes_build.py from Coalition/library/textbook/premise_notes (MANIFEST verified) · Registrar master sha256 e64bfa7ef06444bf9ebd1abb9bf2c9b7562264ad903d1f881f65c38a19ce07be
BUILD_STAMP S328a · 2026-09-11 19:00Z · master e64bfa7ef06444bf · cut 9dcc6ce9a8ee3e02