State and Record Readout Distinguishability
Abstract
Abstract histories preserve endpoint collapse and conditional record separation.
Theorem 1.1 (State readouts merge; record readouts separate conditionally).
Proof. Machine-checked in Lean as D5/S3/ObserverMemory/Trajectories/StateRecordReadoutDistinguishability.state_record_readout_distinguishability (✓ std3). ∎
Source. Repository-derived.
Commentary.
Let Lambda1 be a record type equipped with named AppendOnlyOps: append, a monotonic prefix relation, and a certificate that append preserves that relation. Let O be a RecordedObserver with q1 : X -> A, the controlled update T1 : X x Y2 -> X, and q2 : Lambda1 -> Y2.
Let H be an abstract history carrier. A HistoryEvolution E supplies an advance operation and an observation H -> X x Lambda1, with a law identifying the observation after advance with the source one-step evolution. Endpoint and recordImage are the two projections of that single certified observation.
Let two histories in H have the same endpoint x and respective record images lambda and lambdaPrime, with the images distinct.
The first public conjunct quantifies over every state-only readout s. Since both histories end at x, their state readout values are equal.
The second public conjunct is an equivalence. The composed history readout q2 after the record-image map lies outside its equality kernel exactly when q2(lambda) and q2(lambdaPrime) differ. Thus its two directions are the source’s two record-separation assertions.
The theorem does not claim that q2 separates every pair of distinct records. A constant q2 makes both sides of the equivalence false, as required by the source’s conditional wording.
References
- Truth anchor:
D5/S3/ObserverMemory/Trajectories/StateRecordReadoutDistinguishability.state_record_readout_distinguishability - Dependency: D5/S3/ConceptDynamics/ConceptFiberDecomposition