1793 — The Physical Five-Site Threshold Is Generically Isolated from Existing Supports
Question
Does Entry 1792's logarithmic threshold extension already lie on total-energy, soft, or additional marked-wall support at its physical pinch?
Frozen test
Retain the two reflected source-labelled solutions of
certified in Entries 1788–1790. Evaluate, by exact rational interval arithmetic over the isolated Landau root:
- every remaining labelled wall occurring in the complete 26-term source residue;
- all five internal edge energies.
No wall or edge is removed after inspecting its value.
Result
For each reflected sheet, every remaining labelled wall interval excludes zero. Every edge-energy interval is strictly positive. Therefore each physical pinch has an open neighbourhood in which
is separated from total-energy, soft, and additional marked-wall support.
Scope
This does not prove that the closure of misses the existing supports. It proves only that no iterated support comparison is needed at the physically active generic point. Intersections with existing supports are deeper boundary strata and must be computed separately.
Architectural consequence
The result strengthens the distinction established in Entry 1792:
- the divisor comes from existing marked incidence and routing;
- its generic logarithmic attachment is new coefficient variation;
- it is not a soft or total-energy class in disguise.
No new carrier generator is indicated.
Next falsifier
Compute the closure intersections of with the total-energy and soft divisors. Test their completed local rings and iterated nearby-cycle maps before proposing any supported excess.
Evidence
- research/benincasa/checkers/five_site_g5_source_residue.py
- research/benincasa/results/five-site-g5-source-residue.json
- allocator claim: seqclaim-c8a1440fcf356ba7a823239c