Skip to content
Shadow Theory

Appendix D 4 October 2026

Complete prefix estimates for the compensated writer

Reading position 35 of 37

D Complete prefix estimates for the compensated writer

This appendix closes the clock and pointer derivative estimates used before ta=0.0366 st_a=0.0366\,\mathrm s. All norms are full spinor Hilbert norms, including both internal sectors. Write t=0t=0 at th=−0.002 st_h=-0.002\,\mathrm s, and set

T=0.0386 s,T0=0.03 s,a=vT0=0.03 m,v=1 m/s,M=10 kg,μ=μZ=0.01,κ=ℏ/M. \begin{aligned} T&=0.0386\,\mathrm s,&T_0&=0.03\,\mathrm s,& a&=vT_0=0.03\,\mathrm m,\\ v&=1\,\mathrm{m/s},&M&=10\,\mathrm{kg},& \mu&=\mu_Z=0.01,\qquad\kappa=\hbar/M. \end{aligned}

Clock derivatives are physical SS derivatives; pointer derivatives are with respect to the dimensionless ZZ. All scalar numbers below use SI units for the clock. Removing the same constant Galilean carrier from both exact waves leaves the clock generator vpS+pS2/(2M)vp_S+p_S^2/(2M). The preparation estimates are those of Sections B.5 and B.6; the old-wave bounds are obtained from Sections C.6 and C.5. Thus neither wave nor actual law is replaced at the handoff.

D.1 Finite Gaussian coefficient calculation

Let w=0.003w=0.003, b(s)=24B9(s/w)b(s)=24B_9(s/w) with its constant extensions, and

γ(s,Z)=π−1/4e−(Z−b)2/2eiμb′(Z−b/2),y=Z−b. \gamma(s,Z)=\pi^{-1/4}e^{-(Z-b)^2/2} e^{\mathrm i\mu b'(Z-b/2)},\qquad y=Z-b.

Its first logarithmic derivative is

∂slog⁡γ=cy+d,c=b′+iμb′′,d=iμ2(bb′′−b′2). \partial_s\log\gamma=c y+d, \quad c=b'+\mathrm i\mu b'',\qquad d=\tfrac{\mathrm i\mu}{2}(bb''-b'^2).

The scalar phase in dd is retained. Successive logarithmic derivatives are cy+dcy+d, c′y−cb′+d′c'y-cb'+d', c′′y−2c′b′−cb′′+d′′c''y-2c'b'-cb''+d'', and c′′′y−3c′′b′−3c′b′′−cb′′′+d′′′c'''y-3c''b'-3c'b''-cb'''+d'''. The following rational derivative ceilings specify every coefficient used below:

(B0,B1,B2)=(24,19687.5,105000000),(B3,B4,B5)=(4.9×1011,4.032×1017,4.7936×1020),∣b(j)∣≤Bj. \begin{aligned} (B_0,B_1,B_2)&=(24,19687.5,105000000),\\ (B_3,B_4,B_5)&=(4.9\times10^{11},4.032\times10^{17}, 4.7936\times10^{20}), \end{aligned} \qquad |b^{(j)}|\le B_j.

Here B1=24(315/128)/wB_1=24(315/128)/w follows from B9′=630x4(1−x)4B_9'=630x^4(1-x)^4. Differentiating this identity, using x(1−x)≤1/4x(1-x)\le1/4 and ∣1−2x∣≤1|1-2x|\le1, gives B2=24(2520/64)/w2B_2=24(2520/64)/w^2 and B3=24(7560/16+5040/64)/w3B_3=24(7560/16+5040/64)/w^3. For j=4,5j=4,5 the sufficient coefficient bound is

Bj=24wj∑k=59∣βk∣k!(k−j)!,(β5,…,β9)=(126,−420,540,−315,70). B_j=\frac{24}{w^j} \sum_{k=5}^9 |\beta_k|\frac{k!}{(k-j)!}, \qquad (\beta_5,\ldots,\beta_9)=(126,-420,540,-315,70).

The polynomial and constant extensions are globally C4C^4; their fifth weak derivative is bounded. No endpoint distribution enters these calculations.

Define Cj=Bj+μBj+1C_j=B_j+\mu B_{j+1} for 0≤j≤40\le j\le4 and q0=C0+1q_0=C_0+1. The CjC_j bound the derivatives of b+iμb′b+\mathrm i\mu b'. Define four positive affine polynomials in a formal variable YY:

d0=μ(B0B2+B12)/2,d1=μ(B0B3+B1B2)/2,d2=μ(B0B4+B22)/2,d3=μ(B1B4+B0B5+2B2B3)/2,L1=d0+C1Y,L2=C1B1+d1+C2Y,L3=2C2B1+C1B2+d2+C3Y,L4=3C3B1+3C2B2+C1B3+d3+C4Y.\begin{aligned}d_0&=\mu(B_0B_2+B_1^2)/2,& d_1&=\mu(B_0B_3+B_1B_2)/2,\\ d_2&=\mu(B_0B_4+B_2^2)/2,& d_3&=\mu(B_1B_4+B_0B_5+2B_2B_3)/2,\\ L_1&=d_0+C_1Y,&L_2&=C_1B_1+d_1+C_2Y,\\ L_3&=2C_2B_1+C_1B_2+d_2+C_3Y,&&\\[-2mm] L_4&=3C_3B_1+3C_2B_2+C_1B_3+d_3+C_4Y.&& \end{aligned}

For a positive polynomial P(Y)=∑pjYjP(Y)=\sum p_jY^j, put

N(P)=∑jpj(2j−1)!!/2j,(−1)!!=1. \mathcal N(P)=\sum_jp_j\sqrt{(2j-1)!!/2^j},\qquad(-1)!!=1.

This uses the exact Gaussian moment ∥yjγ∥2=(2j−1)!!/2j\|y^j\gamma\|^2=(2j-1)!!/2^j. Complete, evaluable formulas for the four pointer jets are

g0=1,g1=N(L1),g2=N(L12+L2),g3=N(L13+3L1L2+L3),g4=N(L14+6L12L2+3L22+4L1L3+L4),\begin{align}g_0&=1,&g_1&=\mathcal N(L_1),& g_2&=\mathcal N(L_1^2+L_2),\notag\\ g_3&=\mathcal N(L_1^3+3L_1L_2+L_3),&&&\notag\\[-1mm] g_4&=\mathcal N(L_1^4+6L_1^2L_2+3L_2^2+4L_1L_3+L_4), &&& \tag{92}\end{align}

so that ∥∂sjγ∥≤gj\|\partial_s^j\gamma\|\le g_j. In particular,

g1<1.529437156625049×107,g2<2.344303538271762×1014,g3<3.601493635795900×1021,g4<5.545932284532096×1028. \begin{aligned} g_1&<1.529437156625049\times10^7,& g_2&<2.344303538271762\times10^{14},\\ g_3&<3.601493635795900\times10^{21},& g_4&<5.545932284532096\times10^{28}. \end{aligned}

The defining expressions, rather than these shortened displays, are used in the numerical bounds below.

For A=∂Z+Z−Π1(b+iμb′)A=\partial_Z+Z-\Pi_1(b+\mathrm i\mu b') and Q(f)=(∥Zf∥2+∥pZf∥2)1/2\mathsf Q(f)=(\|Zf\|^2+\|p_Zf\|^2)^{1/2}, the oscillator form identity and [A,Z]=1[A,Z]=1 give

Q(f)≤∥Af∥+q0∥f∥,Q(Zf)≤∥A2f∥+2q0∥Af∥+(q02+1)∥f∥.\begin{align}\mathsf Q(f)&\le\|Af\|+q_0\|f\|,\notag\\ \mathsf Q(Zf)&\le\|A^2f\|+2q_0\|Af\|+(q_0^2+1)\|f\|. \tag{93}\end{align}

They hold fibrewise and then for the Hilbert direct sum over all other coordinates. Differentiating Aγ=0A\gamma=0 gives the weighted jet bounds

qj=q0gj+∑k=1j(jk)Ckgj−k,1≤j≤3,Q(∂sjγ)≤qj. q_j=q_0g_j+\sum_{k=1}^j\binom jk C_kg_{j-k},\qquad 1\le j\le3, \quad \mathsf Q(\partial_s^j\gamma)\le q_j.

Finally, for the writer coefficients F=b/μ+μb′′F=b/\mu+\mu b'' and Cb=b2/(2μ)+μbb′′/2C_b=b^2/(2\mu)+\mu bb''/2, define

F∗=B0/μ+μB2=1052400,F1=B1/μ+μB3=4901968750,F2=B2/μ+μB4=4032010500000000,K1=B0B1/μ+μ(B1B2+B0B3)/2=69183187500,K2=(B12+B0B2)/μ+μ(B22+2B1B3+B0B4)/2=48535884509765625.\begin{align}F_*&=B_0/\mu+\mu B_2=1052400,\notag\\ F_1&=B_1/\mu+\mu B_3=4901968750,\notag\\ F_2&=B_2/\mu+\mu B_4=4032010500000000,\notag\\ K_1&=B_0B_1/\mu+\mu(B_1B_2+B_0B_3)/2=69183187500,\notag\\ K_2&=(B_1^2+B_0B_2)/\mu +\mu(B_2^2+2B_1B_3+B_0B_4)/2 =48535884509765625. \tag{94}\end{align}

These bound ∣F∣,∣F′∣,∣F′′∣,∣Cb′∣,∣Cb′′∣|F|,|F'|,|F''|,|C_b'|,|C_b''|, respectively.

D.2 Exact intertwiner and pulse integrals

Let G∗=V(S)(ψog0)G_*=V(S)(\psi_o g_0), where ψo\psi_o is the full exact old wave, and VV applies the above Weyl displacement in sector one and the identity in sector zero. Since iℏvγS=HZγ\mathrm i\hbar v\gamma_S=H_Z\gamma, product differentiation gives, up to an irrelevant overall sign in the forced error equation,

R/ℏ=κ(γSψo,S+γSSψo/2). R/\hbar=\kappa(\gamma_S\psi_{o,S}+\gamma_{SS}\psi_o/2).

This identity holds separately in the orthogonal sectors and hence for any normalized qubit input. Its support is exactly the open writer pulse; the stationary displaced plateau contributes no source. Write δ=Ψ−G∗\delta=\Psi-G_* and Ij=∫0T∥1pulse∂Sjψo∥ dtI_j=\int_0^T\|\mathbf1_{\rm pulse}\partial_S^j\psi_o\|\,dt. The old characteristic helper has clock centre tlab+0.104t_{\rm lab}+0.104 and half-width 0.00100000010.0010000001. Its earliest pulse contact is 0.0364499999 s0.0364499999\,\mathrm s, leaving Δ=0.0001500001 s\Delta=0.0001500001\,\mathrm s. Throughout those late slices the initial offset lies in an endpoint strip of relative width d=0.1500002d=0.1500002. With σ=0.001\sigma=0.001 and mϕ=1.000001m_\phi=1.000001, define the rational bounds

β=mϕ26435(11/7)8d99,η2=mϕ2102435(11/7)8d77σ2. \beta=m_\phi^2\frac{64}{35}(11/7)^8\frac{d^9}{9},\qquad \eta^2=m_\phi^2\frac{1024}{35}(11/7)^8 \frac{d^7}{7\sigma^2}.

The inequality cos⁡(πx/(2σ))≤π(σ−x)/(2σ)\cos(\pi x/(2\sigma))\le \pi(\sigma-x)/(2\sigma), positive convolution and Jensen's inequality prove that β\beta bounds the strip mass and η\eta its amplitude first-derivative norm. The mollification radius is included in dd. On these slices ∥uS∥≤N1/a\|u_S\|\le N_1/a, N1=34359738369N_1=34359738369. The old-wave estimates, evaluated through elapsed time 0.04040.0404, give ∥ψo−Go∥<3.1×10−11\|\psi_o-G_o\|<3.1\times10^{-11} and ∥∂S(ψo−Go)∥<36000\|\partial_S(\psi_o-G_o)\|<36000. Consequently

I0≤T(3.1×10−11)+Δβ=:J0,I1≤T(36000)+Δ(η+N1β/a)=:J1,I2≤T(1.315×1024)=:J2.\begin{align}I_0&\le T(3.1\times10^{-11})+\Delta\sqrt\beta=:J_0,\notag\\ I_1&\le T(36000)+\Delta(\eta+N_1\sqrt\beta/a)=:J_1,\notag\\ I_2&\le T(1.315\times10^{24})=:J_2. \tag{95}\end{align}

The last bound uses the full old Hessian, including its error. The preparation transfer and old right collar imply ∥δ(0)∥≤3×10−30+1.2×10−37\|\delta(0)\|\le3\times10^{-30}+1.2\times10^{-37}; the latter term bounds (V−I)ψog0(V-I)\psi_og_0 without discarding the tail. Duhamel therefore proves the uniform ceiling

D∗:=3×10−30+1.2×10−37+κ^(g1J1/a+g2J0/(2a2)),∥δ(t)∥≤D∗<5.055628819933504×10−22.\begin{aligned} D_*&:=3\times10^{-30}+1.2\times10^{-37} +\widehat\kappa(g_1J_1/a+g_2J_0/(2a^2)),\\ \|\delta(t)\|&\le D_*<5.055628819933504\times10^{-22}. \end{aligned} (96)

where κ^=1.055×10−35>κ\widehat\kappa=1.055\times10^{-35}>\kappa. All subsequent sharp bounds use the defining expression for D∗D_*.

D.3 Closing the simultaneous pointer hierarchy

For this first, deliberately coarse closure take h−=1.054×10−34<ℏh_-=1.054\times10^{-34}<\hbar, and use κ^\widehat\kappa in positive numerators and h−h_- in denominators. The old physical force ceilings are Fo=8.00000000001×10−6F_o=8.00000000001\times10^{-6} and Fo,2=1F_{o,2}=1. The handoff bounds proved in the preparation appendix are

QuantityOutward upper bound
Q(δ(0))\mathsf Q(\delta(0))6×10−246\times10^{-24}
∥δS(0)∥\|\delta_S(0)\|0.0730.073
Q(δS(0))\mathsf Q(\delta_S(0))300000300000
∥ΨSS(0)∥\|\Psi_{SS}(0)\|2.5×10272.5\times10^{27}
Ah=∥AΨ(0)∥A_h=\|A\Psi(0)\|5.049592328644200595×10−245.049592328644200595\times10^{-24}
A2,h=∥A2Ψ(0)∥A_{2,h}=\|A^2\Psi(0)\|1.228242965202911600×10−171.228242965202911600\times10^{-17}
Uh=∥∂S(AΨ)(0)∥U_h=\|\partial_S(A\Psi)(0)\|276122.9698216115699276122.9698216115699

These already include the remote Weyl change. Differentiating the residual once gives the coefficients 1,3/2,1/21,3/2,1/2. Define its integrated bounds

RQ=κ^(q1J1/a+q2J0/(2a2)),RS=κ^(g1J2/a+3g2J1/(2a2)+g3J0/(2a3)),RSQ=κ^(q1J2/a+3q2J1/(2a2)+q3J0/(2a3)).\begin{aligned}R_Q&=\widehat\kappa(q_1J_1/a+q_2J_0/(2a^2)),\\ R_S&=\widehat\kappa(g_1J_2/a+3g_2J_1/(2a^2)+g_3J_0/(2a^3)),\\ R_{SQ}&=\widehat\kappa(q_1J_2/a+3q_2J_1/(2a^2)+q_3J_0/(2a^3)). \end{aligned}

Oscillator rotation and the differentiated error equation give the successive bounds

Qd=6×10−24+F∗TD∗/T0+RQ,eS=0.073+FoTD∗/h−+T(F1Qd+K1D∗)/(vT02)+RS,P1=1.146×1012+g1/a+eS,A1=Ah+κ^[C1a(J1+g1J0/a+TeS)+C22a2(J0+TD∗)].\begin{aligned}Q_d&=6\times10^{-24}+F_*TD_*/T_0+R_Q,\\ e_S&=0.073+F_oTD_*/h_-+T(F_1Q_d+K_1D_*)/(vT_0^2)+R_S,\\ P_1&=1.146\times10^{12}+g_1/a+e_S,\\ A_1&=A_h+\widehat\kappa\left[ \frac{C_1}{a}(J_1+g_1J_0/a+Te_S) +\frac{C_2}{2a^2}(J_0+TD_*)\right]. \end{aligned}

In particular Qd<6.847×10−16Q_d<6.847\times10^{-16}, eS<1.482×106e_S<1.482\times10^6, and A1<6.192373945249072×10−23A_1<6.192373945249072\times10^{-23}. The last row follows from the exact identity

(i∂t−H/ℏ−1/(μT0))AΨ=−κΠ1(c′ΨS/a+c′′Ψ/(2a2)),c=b+iμb′.(\mathrm i\partial_t-H/\hbar-1/(\mu T_0))A\Psi =-\kappa\Pi_1(c'\Psi_S/a+c''\Psi/(2a^2)), \qquad c=b+\mathrm i\mu b'. (97)

For the second power the exact equation is

(i∂t−H/ℏ−2/(μT0))A2Ψ=−2κΠ1(c′∂S(AΨ)/a+c′′AΨ/(2a2))−κΠ1(c′)2Ψ/a2. (\mathrm i\partial_t-H/\hbar-2/(\mu T_0))A^2\Psi =-2\kappa\Pi_1(c'\partial_S(A\Psi)/a+c''A\Psi/(2a^2)) -\kappa\Pi_1(c')^2\Psi/a^2.

The last source is essential and comes from [A,∂S]=Π1c′/a[A,\partial_S]=\Pi_1c'/a.

For candidate constants (X,P,U,B)(X,P,U,B) bounding (Q(δS),∥ΨSS∥,∥∂S(AΨ)∥,∥A2Ψ∥)(\mathsf Q(\delta_S),\|\Psi_{SS}\|,\|\partial_S(A\Psi)\|, \|A^2\Psi\|), put

Q2=(q02+1)D∗+2q0A1+B,P1Q=q0(1.146×1012)+q1/a+X. Q_2=(q_0^2+1)D_*+2q_0A_1+B,\qquad P_{1Q}=q_0(1.146\times10^{12})+q_1/a+X.

A simultaneous constant supersolution consists of the following four strict inequalities:

X>300000+F∗TeS/T0+FoTQd/h−+T(K1Qd+F1Q2)/(vT02)+RSQ,P>2.5×1027+T[2FoP1+Fo,2h−+2(F1P1Q+K1P1)vT02+F2(q0+Qd)+K2v2T03],U>Uh+T[FoA1h−+F1(B+q0A1)+K1A1vT02+κ^(C1Pa+3C2P12a2+C32a3)],B>A2,h+Tκ^(2C1U/a+C2A1/a2+C12/a2).\begin{align}X&>300000+F_*Te_S/T_0+F_oTQ_d/h_- +T(K_1Q_d+F_1Q_2)/(vT_0^2)+R_{SQ},\notag\\ P&>2.5\times10^{27}+T\left[ \frac{2F_oP_1+F_{o,2}}{h_-} +\frac{2(F_1P_{1Q}+K_1P_1)}{vT_0^2} +\frac{F_2(q_0+Q_d)+K_2}{v^2T_0^3}\right],\notag\\ U&>U_h+T\left[\frac{F_oA_1}{h_-} +\frac{F_1(B+q_0A_1)+K_1A_1}{vT_0^2} +\widehat\kappa\left(\frac{C_1P}{a} +\frac{3C_2P_1}{2a^2}+\frac{C_3}{2a^3}\right)\right],\notag\\ B&>A_{2,h}+T\widehat\kappa (2C_1U/a+C_2A_1/a^2+C_1^2/a^2). \tag{98}\end{align}

These follow from the twice differentiated Schrödinger equation, (97), and (93). In particular the force on AΨA\Psi costs B+q0A1B+q_0A_1, not merely A1A_1. For (X,P,U,B)=(1014,1040,2×1011,2×10−17)(X,P,U,B)=(10^{14},10^{40},2\times10^{11},2\times10^{-17}) the respective right sides are strictly below

RX<4.011662441023×1012,RP<6.718077927095×1039,RU<1.452034044217×1011,RB<1.809106526629×10−17. \begin{aligned} \mathcal R_X&<4.011662441023\times10^{12},& \mathcal R_P&<6.718077927095\times10^{39},\\ \mathcal R_U&<1.452034044217\times10^{11},& \mathcal R_B&<1.809106526629\times10^{-17}. \end{aligned}

Every dependence on the other three unknowns has been retained. The positive integral inequalities and a simultaneous first-crossing argument prove the four bounds. The large 104010^{40} bound is used only inside this hierarchy; the next subsection supplies the much sharper error Hessian needed for the clock current.

D.4 Old third clock derivative with complete coefficients

Only an ordinary third spatial clock derivative of the old wave is needed; no fourth radial energy graph is invoked. Sections B.3 and B.4 give the following outward bounds for the gauged old preparation error EgE_g:

P2=3.238008492819540878×10−49,P4=1.075566867715738537×10−76,n2=5.970369147764257548×10−38, \begin{aligned} P_2&=3.238008492819540878\times10^{-49},\\ P_4&=1.075566867715738537\times10^{-76},\\ n_2&=5.970369147764257548\times10^{-38}, \end{aligned}

where ∥pSjEg∥≤Pj\|p_S^jE_g\|\le P_j and n2n_2 bounds the second left collar. For a cutoff equal to one through 0.100050.10005, zero from 0.100150.10015, and g=0.0001g=0.0001, the localized interpolation identities give

L1=n2P2+10ℏ+n2/g,L2=n2(P4+18ℏ+P2/g),ℏ+=1.055×10−34. L_1=\sqrt{n_2P_2}+10\hbar_+ n_2/g,\qquad L_2=\sqrt{n_2}\bigl(\sqrt{P_4}+18\hbar_+\sqrt{P_2}/g\bigr), \quad \hbar_+=1.055\times10^{-34}.

This cutoff covers every preparation-phase derivative, whose support ends at 0.100010.10001, and lies inside the full-one region of the old second collar, which ends at 0.1002499998730.100249999873. For the preparation-rate jets use

(a0,a1,a2)=(140,43600,70141750),(a3,a4)=(1387431060000,986084475600000),μr+=1.425×10−12,Fp=0.080802, \begin{aligned} (a_0,a_1,a_2)&=(140,43600,70141750),\\ (a_3,a_4)&=(1387431060000,986084475600000),\\ \mu_r^+&=1.425\times10^{-12},\qquad F_p=0.080802, \end{aligned}

and put rj=μr+Fpaj/2r_j=\mu_r^+F_pa_j/2 for j=1,2,3j=1,2,3. Expanding pS3(eiθEg)p_S^3(e^{\mathrm i\theta}E_g), with ℏ∣∂Sjθ∣≤rj\hbar|\partial_S^j\theta|\le r_j, proves the handoff bound

E3,h:=h−−3[P2P4+3r1L2+3(r12+ℏ+r2)L1+(r13+3ℏ+r1r2+ℏ+2r3)n2]+46933757821.201.\begin{align}E_{3,h}:={}&h_-^{-3}\left[ \sqrt{P_2P_4}+3r_1L_2+3(r_1^2+\hbar_+r_2)L_1\right.\notag\\[-1mm] &\left.\hspace{22mm} +(r_1^3+3\hbar_+r_1r_2+\hbar_+^2r_3)n_2\right] +46933757821.201. \tag{99}\end{align}

The last term bounds the original packet's third derivative. The helper's radial state is SS independent at handoff and its preparation phase is zero there. Thus ∥ψo,SSS(0)∥≤E3,h<2.250395507380083×1042\|\psi_{o,SSS}(0)\|\le E_{3,h}<2.250395507380083\times10^{42}.

Here are the old-wave input ceilings used on the enlarged horizon To=0.0404T_o=0.0404, computed with the formulas of Sections C.6 and C.5:

InputOutward upper bound
Do=sup⁡∥ψo−Go∥D_o=\sup\|\psi_o-G_o\|3.034654348976846863×10−113.034654348976846863\times10^{-11}
e1,o=sup⁡∥∂S(ψo−Go)∥e_{1,o}=\sup\|\partial_S(\psi_o-G_o)\|35444.2263484728817635444.22634847288176
e2,o=sup⁡∥∂S2(ψo−Go)∥e_{2,o}=\sup\|\partial_S^2(\psi_o-G_o)\|1.047307159416726327×10211.047307159416726327\times10^{21}
G1=sup⁡∥Go,S∥G_1=\sup\|G_{o,S}\|1145324612300.0000031145324612300.000003
G2=sup⁡∥Go,SS∥G_2=\sup\|G_{o,SS}\|1.313080270080687692×10241.313080270080687692\times10^{24}
Fc,1F_{c,1}4.388993584524007892×10−64.388993584524007892\times10^{-6}
Fc,2F_{c,2}0.080540470249090086470.08054047024909008647

For clarity the enlargement keeps the same ramp interval 0.00330.0033 and uses static duration To−0.0033=0.0371<0.0377T_o-0.0033=0.0371<0.0377. The helper age remains below 4/3<π/24/3<\pi/2. Its packet ceilings are

p1=1.00000116/7 π/(2σ),p2=1.000001512/35 (π/(2σ))2, p_1=1.000001\sqrt{16/7}\,\pi/(2\sigma),\quad p_2=1.000001\sqrt{512/35}\,(\pi/(2\sigma))^2,

so that, with N2=1.001(235+1)2N_2=1.001(2^{35}+1)^2,

G1≤p12+(N1/a)2,G2≤p2+2p1N1/a+N2/a2+25000N1/a. G_1\le\sqrt{p_1^2+(N_1/a)^2},\qquad G_2\le p_2+2p_1N_1/a+N_2/a^2+25000N_1/a.

The three error entries are the sums of the transported preparation, short ramp, static, common-to-clipped and clipped-to-static component bounds evaluated at these durations; no new propagation assumption is introduced by extending the time argument.

The remote third force, including the preparation phase-square term, has the complete upper expression

Fc,3=μr+a4Fp/2+μr+(3a1a2+a0a3)(0.201)2+(μr+)24M(3a2a3+a1a4)Fp2+2.393692459677192×10−27.\begin{align}F_{c,3}={}&\mu_r^+a_4F_p/2 +\mu_r^+(3a_1a_2+a_0a_3)(0.201)^2\notag\\ &+\frac{(\mu_r^+)^2}{4M}(3a_2a_3+a_1a_4)F_p^2 +2.393692459677192\times10^{-27}. \tag{100}\end{align}

The last summand is the third quiet-force derivative obtained from the finite product-rule calculation in Section C.4. Thus Fc,3<68.48117358490407F_{c,3}<68.48117358490407. Put

W0=ℏ+(235+1)/T0,Fa,1=25000W0,Fa,2=2520W064(0.0001)2,Fa,3=(7560/16+5040/64)W0(0.0001)3. \begin{aligned} W_0&=\hbar_+(2^{35}+1)/T_0,&F_{a,1}&=25000W_0,\\ F_{a,2}&=\frac{2520W_0}{64(0.0001)^2},& F_{a,3}&=\frac{(7560/16+5040/64)W_0}{(0.0001)^3}. \end{aligned}

The remote common-minus-clipped force is supported on S≤0.10001S\le0.10001. The helper and all its SS derivatives vanish there for the entire prefix, since its left support starts at 0.10099999990.1009999999 and moves right. The third differentiated unitary equation therefore gives

ddt∥ψo,SSS∥≤R3:=h−−1[3Fc,1e2,o+3Fc,2e1,o+Fc,3Do+3Fa,1(G2+e2,o)+3Fa,2(G1+e1,o)+Fa,3].\begin{aligned}\frac{d}{dt}\|\psi_{o,SSS}\|\le R_3:={}& h_-^{-1}\bigl[3F_{c,1}e_{2,o}+3F_{c,2}e_{1,o}+F_{c,3}D_o\\ &\qquad+3F_{a,1}(G_2+e_{2,o}) +3F_{a,2}(G_1+e_{1,o})+F_{a,3}\bigr]. \end{aligned}

In particular the large helper Hessian is not charged on the remote force support. Integrating the linear envelope once more yields

J3:=TE3,h+12T2R3<9.746858547719537661×1046,I3≤J3.J_3:=TE_{3,h}+\tfrac12T^2R_3 <9.746858547719537661\times10^{46},\qquad I_3\le J_3. (101)

D.5 Localized first derivative and refined mixed moment

Take a fixed decreasing Lipschitz cutoff χ=1\chi=1 on S≤0.126S\le0.126, χ=0\chi=0 on S≥0.136S\ge0.136, with ∣χ′∣≤1/gL|\chi'|\le1/g_L, gL=0.01g_L=0.01. Every old clock-force derivative is supported in its full-one region (S≤0.106S\le0.106), while the residual starts at S=0.14145S=0.14145. The positive constant drift favors departure from this left region. The forced continuity identity, with no source on the support of χ\chi, gives

nL(t):=∥χδ(t)∥≤nL,h+κgL∫0t∥δS(u)∥ du,nL,h=7.901146211666425714×10−36.n_L(t):=\|\chi\delta(t)\| \le n_{L,h}+\frac\kappa{g_L}\int_0^t\|\delta_S(u)\|\,du, \qquad n_{L,h}=7.901146211666425714\times10^{-36}. (102)

Since AG∗=0AG_*=0, improve the oscillator bound to Q~=A1+q0D∗\widetilde Q=A_1+q_0D_*. Let R~S=(κ/κ^)RS\widetilde R_S=(\kappa/\widehat\kappa)R_S and similarly R~SQ=(κ/κ^)RSQ\widetilde R_{SQ}=(\kappa/\widehat\kappa)R_{SQ}. For the candidate e=0.1e=0.1, define

n∗=nL,h+κTe/gL,E=0.073+FoTn∗/ℏ+T(F1Q~+K1D∗)/(vT02)+R~S.\begin{align}n_*&=n_{L,h}+\kappa Te/g_L,\notag\\ \mathcal E&=0.073+F_oTn_*/\hbar +T(F_1\widetilde Q+K_1D_*)/(vT_0^2) +\widetilde R_S. \tag{103}\end{align}

The positive two-variable comparison closes because E<0.07327295767972046<e\mathcal E<0.07327295767972046<e. Consequently ∥δS∥≤0.1\|\delta_S\|\le0.1 and nL≤n∗<1.197180×10−35n_L\le n_*<1.197180\times10^{-35} throughout the prefix. The improvement retains the old force but multiplies it by its actual localized error norm.

On that force support A=∂Z+ZA=\partial_Z+Z and AG∗=0AG_*=0. Applying the oscillator identity on each SS slice, without differentiating a sharp indicator, gives Q(1old forceδ)≤A12+n∗2\mathsf Q(\mathbf1_{\rm old\ force}\delta) \le\sqrt{A_1^2+n_*^2}. Set B=2×10−17B=2\times10^{-17} in Q2Q_2 above. The differentiated oscillator rotation equation now proves the much sharper uniform bound

X∗:=300000+F∗Te/T0+FoTA12+n∗2/ℏ+T(K1Q~+F1Q2)/(vT02)+R~SQ,Q(δS)≤X∗<616735.\begin{align}X_*:={}&300000+F_*Te/T_0 +F_oT\sqrt{A_1^2+n_*^2}/\hbar\notag\\ &+T(K_1\widetilde Q+F_1Q_2)/(vT_0^2) +\widetilde R_{SQ}, \qquad\mathsf Q(\delta_S)\le X_*<616735. \tag{104}\end{align}

This is the mixed moment required in the clock estimate; the coarse 101410^{14} bound from (98) is not substituted here.

D.6 Second clock derivative and the two absolute currents

Two residual derivatives give exactly

RSS/ℏ=κ(γSψo,SSS+52γSSψo,SS+2γSSSψo,S+12γSSSSψo). R_{SS}/\hbar=\kappa\left( \gamma_S\psi_{o,SSS}+\tfrac52\gamma_{SS}\psi_{o,SS} +2\gamma_{SSS}\psi_{o,S}+\tfrac12\gamma_{SSSS}\psi_o\right).

Its integrated norm is bounded by the explicit expression

RSS∗=κ(g1J3/a+5g2J2/(2a2)+2g3J1/a3+g4J0/(2a4)). R_{SS}^*=\kappa(g_1J_3/a+5g_2J_2/(2a^2) +2g_3J_1/a^3+g_4J_0/(2a^4)).

The refined new-minus-old handoff Hessian from Section B.6, plus both derivatives of the remote Weyl change, gives the following expression. Here n2,R=5.970369147764257548×10−38n_{2,R}=5.970369147764257548\times10^{-38} is the right second-collar ceiling from Section B.5. It equals the numerical left-collar ceiling n2n_2 because reflecting the moving-cutoff construction gives the same positive momentum inequality: the right boundary translates at vv plus the drift ceiling and the left boundary at vv minus that ceiling. The right collar is one throughout the writer support; its handoff full-one edge is below 0.1037500001270.103750000127, while Son=0.14145S_{\rm on}=0.14145. Thus the required right-tail amplitude is bounded independently of the left-tail localization used in (99). Explicitly,

Hh=1.828509471006939478×1019+2(2.534074040624599816×10−57)ℏ2+2g1(1.390399439216243060×10−43)aℏ+g2n2,Ra2.\begin{align}H_h={}&1.828509471006939478\times10^{19} +\frac{2(2.534074040624599816\times10^{-57})}{\hbar^2} \notag\\ &+\frac{2g_1(1.390399439216243060\times10^{-43})}{a\hbar} +\frac{g_2n_{2,R}}{a^2}. \tag{105}\end{align}

For H(t)=∥δSS(t)∥H(t)=\|\delta_{SS}(t)\|, integration by parts with χ\chi gives

∥1old forceδS∥≤n∗H(t)+2D∗/gL. \|\mathbf1_{\rm old\ force}\delta_S\| \le\sqrt{n_*H(t)}+2D_*/g_L.

The cutoff cost is retained. Twice differentiating the error equation therefore yields the differential comparison H′≤2αH+f(t)H^\prime\le 2\alpha\sqrt H+f(t), where α=Fon∗/ℏ\alpha=F_o\sqrt{n_*}/\hbar, f≥0f\ge0, and H(0)+∫0Tf(t) dt≤RH(0)+\int_0^T f(t)\,dt\le\mathcal R with

R=Hh+RSS∗+4FoTD∗ℏgL+Fo,2Tn∗ℏ+2T(F1X∗+K1e)vT02+T(F2Q~+K2D∗)v2T03.\begin{align}\mathcal R={}&H_h+R_{SS}^* +\frac{4F_oTD_*}{\hbar g_L} +\frac{F_{o,2}Tn_*}{\hbar}\notag\\ &+\frac{2T(F_1X_*+K_1e)}{vT_0^2} +\frac{T(F_2\widetilde Q+K_2D_*)}{v^2T_0^3}. \tag{106}\end{align}

Indeed, writing F(t)=Hh+∫0tf(u) duF(t)=H_h+\int_0^t f(u)\,du, the function [αt+F(t)]2[\alpha t+\sqrt{F(t)}]^2 has derivative at least 2α[αt+F(t)]+f(t)2\alpha[\alpha t+\sqrt{F(t)}]+f(t) and dominates the initial value. Scalar differential comparison therefore proves

H(t)≤H∗:=(FoTn∗/ℏ+R)2<1.117214708915152634×1021.H(t)\le H_*:=\left(F_oT\sqrt{n_*}/\hbar+\sqrt{\mathcal R}\right)^2 <1.117214708915152634\times10^{21}. (107)

Regularization at zero justifies this comparison when a norm vanishes. Smooth-domain approximation and these uniform finite estimates justify the oscillator and weak clock commutations without an oscillator cutoff.

On S<SonS<S_{\rm on}, G∗=ψog0G_*=\psi_og_0 and A=∂Z+ZA=\partial_Z+Z. The oscillator form and graph identities imply, after restriction to that region,

∥δZ∥≤eZ:=A12+D∗2,∥δZZ∥≤eZZ:=B2+4A12+3D∗2. \|\delta_Z\|\le e_Z:=\sqrt{A_1^2+D_*^2},\qquad \|\delta_{ZZ}\|\le e_{ZZ}:=\sqrt{B^2+4A_1^2+3D_*^2}.

For example ∥pZ2f∥2≤∥(pZ2+Z2)f∥2+2∥f∥2\|p_Z^2f\|^2\le\|(p_Z^2+Z^2)f\|^2+2\|f\|^2 and ∥(B†B+1)f∥2=∥B2f∥2+4∥Bf∥2+∥f∥2\|(\mathcal B^\dagger\mathcal B+1)f\|^2 =\|\mathcal B^2f\|^2+4\|\mathcal Bf\|^2+\|f\|^2 with B=∂Z+Z\mathcal B=\partial_Z+Z prove the second bound. The conditional-rank stability functional then gives

IZ≤TμT0(22eZ+2eZ2+2332D∗+eZZ)<2.574814383253091344×10−15.I_Z\le\frac{T}{\mu T_0} \left(2\sqrt2e_Z+2e_Z^2+\frac{23\sqrt3}{2}D_*+e_{ZZ}\right) <2.574814383253091344\times10^{-15}. (108)

Here the comparison's radial direction is independent of ZZ; ∥g0′∥=1/2\|g_0'\|=1/\sqrt2, ∥g0′′∥=3/2\|g_0''\|=\sqrt3/2 and ∥g0′2/g0∥=3/2\|g_0'^2/g_0\|=\sqrt3/2 supply the displayed coefficients. For the clock functional use the old characteristic helper instead. Expanding its positive stability majorant with the additional error δ\delta gives

ΔIS≤κT[4(G1+e1,o)e+2e2+14D∗QG+9D∗G2+H∗],QG=1.0000014π2σ23/35+(N1/a)2,ΔIS<4.547786946512146880×10−16.\begin{align}\Delta I_S&\le\kappa T\left[ 4(G_1+e_{1,o})e+2e^2+14D_*Q_G+9D_*G_2+H_*\right],\notag\\ Q_G&=1.000001\frac{4\pi^2}{\sigma^2}\sqrt{3/35}+(N_1/a)^2, \notag\\[-1mm] \Delta I_S&<4.547786946512146880\times10^{-16}. \tag{109}\end{align}

This is an increment of an absolute-current upper bound, not a subtraction of signed currents. All hidden-coordinate absolute values precede integration. Both estimates apply on the common whole-prefix good-clock event; its complement is charged separately in the event composition. The current components must be added before optimizing the single rank collar.

Reproducible outward arithmetic.

Equations (92)–(109), together with the outward input tables, form a finite coefficient specification. Every displayed decimal input is an exact rational ceiling. One fully rational evaluation uses a bracket for π\pi of width 2×10−692\times10^{-69} about 3.1415926535897932384626433832795028841971693993751058209749445923078173.141592653589793238462643383279502884197169399375105820974944592307817 and ℏ=6.62607015×10−34/(2π)\hbar=6.62607015\times10^{-34}/(2\pi). For a nonnegative rational x=n/dx=n/d, replace each square root by

sqrt⁡+(x)=1+⌊⌊10200n/d⌋⌋10100. \operatorname{sqrt}_+(x)= \frac{1+\left\lfloor\sqrt{\left\lfloor10^{200}n/d\right\rfloor} \right\rfloor}{10^{100}}.

All these coefficient expressions have positive inputs; use upper numerators and lower denominators. This procedure gives X∗<616734.119066647397144X_*<616734.119066647397144, H∗<1.117214708915152634×1021H_*<1.117214708915152634\times10^{21}, and the strict current bounds (108)–(109). It specifies the calculations inside the manuscript and requires no external coefficient file.