The image and limit
How many limits a growth law has, what a cheapest-move
policy converges to, and the local invariant that decides whether the
openings ever stop.
A growth law is a structural demand plus a greedy move:
extend the modulus N by the least m ≥ 2 meeting the
demand (Growth). Each filed demand's GREEDY policy
realizes one fate — breadth
(independence)
seats every prime, depth (λ, the exponent of the unit
group, must grow) collapses onto one prime's column, mortality
(capacity with λ frozen) halts. Every run has a limit:
the supernatural number ∏p
pep whose exponents, each in
{0, 1, 2, …, ∞}, record how deep the run ever took each prime. The
three fates are three properties of that limit, and they are the
extremes of a larger body: the whole set of limits a demand can reach
at all.
Two policies matter. The free policy class of a demand
admits every move the demand allows; the greedy policy takes
the least admissible move at every step. Both have a set of reachable
limits, and the greedy set is a single point wherever
“least” names a single move — though not ONLY there, which
is what the trichotomy below turns on.
The fate image
Fix a demand L and a seed s, the modulus a run
starts from. The image
Im(L, s) is the set of limits reachable from s by
the whole free policy class. Five demands are filed and they have five
different images — so a demand is not pinned by the fate its greedy
policy happens to realize.
The fate
image rule
Writing S for an infinite set of primes disjoint from the
support of s:
| demand | image |
| transparency |
W(λ(s)) — one finite point |
| semisimplicity |
s·∏p∈S p |
| independence |
s·∏p∈S
pep, 1 ≤
ep < ∞ |
| new idempotents |
every multiple of s of infinite support |
| dynamics |
every infinite multiple of s |
The last four nest strictly in that order; transparency sits
outside the chain, being the only one whose single member is finite.
Every image parameterizes the same way — a SUPPORT choice, then an
EXPONENT choice on it — and the three fates are its extremes.
Mortality pins both coordinates minimal and is the only true corner.
Breadth pins the support maximal and leaves the exponents free;
depth pins an exponent maximal and leaves the support free: each is
a FACE, extremal in one coordinate. So two runs can both hold the
depth fate and still differ, and a generic member of an image is
interior and holds none of the three — a free policy holding no fate
is the ordinary condition, not an anomaly. The two coordinates being
separately free is also why fate purity fails over Z for free
policies: 2∞·∏(odd primes) carries breadth and depth at
once and is reached under both demands that host both. Greedy
independence lands where the two coordinates are extreme in opposite
directions — every prime, every exponent 1 — which is the primorial
limit.
Scope. The chain is a SQUAREFREE-SEED
statement: from any other seed semisimplicity admits nothing, its
image is the single point {s}, and it leaves the chain by the
same door transparency never entered. Independence reaches its shape
from any seed, the seed's own exponents frozen. Closure halves
exhaustive over a state × move battery, reach halves constructed
plus a stated continuation argument; the extremes are a synthesis
over the five. Redrawn over
F2[x] — states monic polynomials, moves of
degree ≥ 1 — the same five shapes, the same chain and the same
extremes, 0 mismatches against the Z table.
verifiers:
explore_fate_image.py,
explore_fate_image_ff.py
Two things the greedy reading cannot see. A free policy under the
dynamics demand reaches 2∞ from the void, the seed 1 —
push 4, not 2, and λ moves — where greedy dynamics locks the
3-column and
never opens the 2-window at all, so that window's invisibility at
birth belongs to greed and not to the demand. And an image is not
determined by the fates it contains: new idempotents and dynamics
agree on all three fates and differ on everything else.
How many limits a cheapest-move policy has
Over Z the greedy policy has exactly one limit by
definition rather than by measurement: “least m” is
a total order, so no run ever chooses. Off Z it is not — over
F2[x] the void's first dynamics move is a
three-way tie between x2,
(x+1)2 and x2+x+1, all at
cost 2 — and the set of limits the minimal-move policy class reaches
is the greedy image. In a ring past Z the primes are
places, each carrying a degree: the degree of the
irreducible for polynomials, the logarithm of the norm — the size of
the residue field — for a number ring. In a quadratic number ring a
rational prime either splits into two distinct places, stays
inert as one place of degree 2, or ramifies as one place
repeated — the multiplicity being the ramification index
e. A move that seats a place not yet seated is an
opening,
and an opening SURVIVES when the choice it made is still visible in
the limit.
The cardinality
trichotomy rule
Under the dynamics demand the greedy image takes three
cardinalities across the rings run, and the space between them is
empty. Over Z it is a single point. Over a quadratic number
ring it is FINITE: the run LOCKS — past some move it never opens a
new place again — so only finitely many openings ever survive. Over
F2[x] and over the coordinate ring of an
elliptic curve over F2 the openings recur forever
and each choice is made permanent, so the image has the cardinality
of the CONTINUUM. Nothing sits between: a surviving opening is a
tie, hence carries at least 2 choices, and a run's openings are
countable — finitely many surviving give a finite product, countably
many give at least 2ℵ₀ and at most
ℵ₀ℵ₀, which is the same cardinal. So no greedy image
is countably infinite. All three come from one formula — the
product, over the surviving openings, of the tie multiplicity at
each — so what separates the rings is how many openings survive and
not how deep their arithmetic runs. Over Z the product is
empty: the run opens constantly and not one of its openings is a
tie.
Scope. The dynamics demand, and the
(demand, ring) pair rather than the ring: greedy independence over
F2[x] ties at its openings exactly as
dynamics does and still reaches one point, because coprimality
READMITS the declined sibling a move later and no opening survives.
The number-ring half is a rule in range, censused seeds over two
quadratic rings growing by ideals and by elements alike, 0 branch
merges; the continuum
half runs over F2[x] and the complete
h = 1..5 elliptic ladder at q = 2; the empty middle is
a derivation from the formula and inherits its scope. The SIZE of a
finite image is not claimed here — the per-opening product is a
lower bound on it, the correction being a within-degree multiplicity
the product does not carry.
verifiers:
explore_greedy_image_nf.py,
explore_greedy_image_ec.py
An opening fails to survive in exactly two ways, and neither can
fail endlessly, which is what keeps the middle of that trichotomy
empty. A choice can be ERASED, two permanently distinct runs reaching
one limit because the move a locked run makes forever afterwards
carries BOTH members of a tied pair to infinity together and forgets
which run seated which — but erasure needs such a move, which is what
a lock is, and a lock stops the openings. A choice can also lose PERMANENCE, the
declined sibling returning later as a passenger on someone else's
move. That one is real over an elliptic ring whose ideal
classes — the finite group measuring how far the ring's ideals are
from being generated by a single element — number at least 3, and it
is capped: a return is itself a seating, depths never fall, so each
candidate is lost at most once and only the openings before its
seating can fail. The cap holds for a reason smaller than the two
classical theorems first used for it — that group is finite and each
cost level holds finitely many ideals, so every class has a least cost
attained finitely often, and any Dedekind ring with those two
properties has a bounded supply of passengers.
What a run converges to
Cardinality counts the futures and says nothing about what one of
them is. A limit in a ring is an exponent per place, exactly as a
supernatural number is an exponent per rational prime, and the whole
of it can be written down. What sets the shape is a clock. Deepening
a place already seated — a repeat move — advances a counter,
the tick T, and a move's price is read against it: an
exponent already at or under the tick buys nothing new, so a repeat
must climb past it and costs the degree times the climb. Over
F2[x] the tick DOUBLES at every repeat.
The ideal
limit theorem
Where the tick doubles, a greedy run's limit is
one place C carrying an unbounded exponent, one further
place Pd at exponent 1 at each degree d the
run ever opens, and every seated place other than C standing
at exponent 1 FOREVER — a single deep coordinate over a flat support
that never stops growing. C is itself one of the opened
degrees' places exactly when its degree is 2. Four facts make it.
The tick doubles at a repeat move and a fresh opening leaves it
alone, so every exponent ever written is 0, 1, or the tick at its
own repeat plus 1. No place's price is ever below
d·T/2. A deepened place of degree 1 is therefore
permanent, every rival's price rising by at least as much as its own
at every later repeat. And a fresh opening at degree d
multiplies λ by 2d−1, so degree 1 is never
eligible — 21−1 = 1 divides everything — while the fresh
ladder opens degrees 2, 3, 4, … one place at a time forever, since
2d−1 carries a prime no smaller one does, by
Bang's theorem, whose only exceptions are d = 1 and
d = 6, where a square of 3 does the same work.
Scope. Proved by induction over the move
model, calling on no computation, for runs growing by IDEALS in a
world whose tick doubles; and a rule in range, 11 branches at six
function-field rings walked 300 moves each with every move's tick
and exponent read. The move model is base 2 throughout, and the leg
that makes the support grow FOREVER leans on it: Bang's theorem is
the base-2 Zsygmondy, so the endless ladder is a claim about
F2 and not about doubling ticks in general. The
deep place's degree is 1 or 2 — 0 of 140 censused repeat moves at
degree 3 or above — and that ceiling is a consequence of the
doubling, not of the shape.
verifier:
explore_greedy_limit.py
“Every other coordinate stops at 1 forever” is the
doubling clock's, and one world over it is false. Where the tick
instead lands exactly on the exponent it answers — which is a number
ring — a place can be
carried above exponent 1 by one move made while prices are still low
and then be priced out of every later one: a strand, permanent
because the repeated move a locked run makes costs the same forever
after. Measured in both quadratic rings: from the void neither seats a
ramified place at all, both locking on a split place of norm 3 at cost
3 over a support flat as stated above. Plant one and the affordable
ones strand — the ramified place over 2 stands at exponent 3, the one
over 5 at exponent 2, each priced above the locked run's own recurrent
cost, while the third such place the two rings have sits at norm 23
against a lock at 3 and cannot afford even its one cheap move. So a
number ring's flat support is the arithmetic of its openings and not a
theorem about rings.
The element
limit rule
Grow by ELEMENTS rather than by ideals — every state and every
move generated by one element — and a move seats a whole bundle of
places at once. A bundle can raise an exponent with no repeat move
at all, breaking the exponent ceiling the ideal limit rests on, but
it cannot do so often: an opening costs the bare degree when the
place it seats is PRINCIPAL — generated by a single element — and
strictly more otherwise, and past a handful of degrees there are
principal places to spare, so a greedy run stops paying for bundles
within its first few moves. After that the only source left is the
run's own repeat move, one per ERA — the stretch between two
repeats — against an era whose length doubles. The limit is then
∞·C, plus at most the places of one orbit of the ideal
classes, fixed by C's own class and gaining about one unit an
era, plus one place at exponent 1 at each opened degree. It
collapses to the ideal shape exactly when that orbit is empty or is
C itself. So the two ways of growing differ by a
logarithmically deep coordinate and never by the headline.
Scope. Proved for the steady state; a rule
in range over six rings walked 300 moves on every branch a capped
tie sweep enumerated — three extra coordinates at one ring on every
branch carried, three to five at another, those two being the rings
whose sweep hit its cap. Whether the extra coordinates are UNBOUNDED
is OPEN: at one ring the bundle income stopped dead once a parity
locked. The element world has no reordering lemma — a declined
minimal move is still minimal at the successor at only 46 of 85
types at one ring — so its shapes are read over every branch and
never off one continuation.
verifier:
explore_element_limit.py
The argument uses no geometry
The curve enters none of it, and neither does the ring.
The limit belongs to
the schedule, not the ring rule
Take the ring out and four ingredients remain: items carrying an
integer DEGREE; one GLOBAL CLOCK multiplying the tick by b
whenever any item is deepened; a PRICE f(degree, staleness),
staleness
being how far the tick has moved since that item last did; and a
fresh-opening DISCOUNT spendable m times at each degree, the
least degree born with its discount already spent. The ring enters
only as a SUPPLY — how many items each degree holds. Dial each as
far as the move model admits — b at 3/2, 2, 3 and 4, the
degree's exponent at 0, 1 and 2 and an additive form, one to three
discounts, every born-spent set — and ONE INFINITE COORDINATE
survives every dial but one. The dial that kills it is the
degree-blind price, which cannot tell a cheap item from a dear one —
and only where the clock's steps are wider than 1. At step 1 an
opening and a repeat cost the same, the tie deepens rather than
opens, and one item runs away regardless.
A FLAT SUPPORT is the weaker half and does not survive as far, so
the two are separate claims. At b ≥ 3 the ceiling has already
fallen to
the least degree while the clock still seats an item above it, so
that item is seated, clocked, then undercut and STRANDED above
exponent 1 forever — exactly one such item on every branch that
hands the clock on, and none on the branch whose first repeat was
also its last. The doubling clock of the theorem above is precisely
where that cannot happen.
Scope. Proved for the abstract schedule, and
a rule in range: 60 walks over ten schedules and six supplies, with
the abstract walker certified equal to the exact one in cost, in
every move type's multiplicity and in the covered set at 120 states
over each of six supplies. The dial survey is crossed with the
clock's landing rule rather than read beside it — 7 landing rules ×
8 dials × 2 clocks — and the single infinite coordinate holds at all
49 crossed cells whose price can see a degree UNDER THE GLOBAL
CLOCK. Give each item its own tick instead and the count standing
above exponent 1 moves with the dial and with the clock's step width
together, which is the mixed run below. Strands arise on both sides
by different mechanisms — there the ceiling falls under a seated
item, in a mixed run the item's own step widens under it.
verifiers:
explore_price_schedule.py,
explore_tick_pump.py
That dynamics has a name outside this subject. Size-based priority
with aging is a scheduling discipline in production use — its UNIX
form halves a usage counter every second, which is this clock at
b = 2 — and it has a deterministic limit analysis of its own:
Epema's decay-usage steady state (ACM TOCS 16(4), 1998)
partitions a fixed job set into monopolisers, a shared middle, and
classes that starve at share exactly zero. The claims above are
narrower than that overlap suggests: a size-discriminated ceiling in
closed form, under ADMISSION from a supply that never runs out, so the
support itself grows — which a fixed job set does not do.
Lock or sprawl is the characteristic
Whether the openings ever stop is what separates a finite image
from a continuum, and it turns on a single local invariant.
The lock/sprawl
dichotomy rule
Replace the clock's factor b by the SET of exponents the
tick may stand at, the tick advancing to the least member at or
above the exponent just landed on. That set is exactly
{a : v(a+1) > v(a)} for
v the valuation λ carries at the place, and the whole
of what it gives the dynamics is its gap: the distance from
one member to the next, which is the price of a repeat move divided
by the degree. A ring whose gaps are BOUNDED stops opening new
places, at about the deep place's degree times the largest gap; a
ring whose gaps are UNBOUNDED opens forever. Which one a ring has is
settled by
the principal-unit filtration
(O/Pa)* = k* ×
(1+P)/(1+Pa): the p-th power map
sends level i to p·i in equal characteristic —
a multiplicative set, gaps unbounded, SPRAWL — and to
min(i+e, p·i) in mixed characteristic,
which is i+e past a leading stretch — constant gap,
LOCK, with the gap the RAMIFICATION INDEX e. A set whose gap
grows without being multiplicative is realized by no Dedekind domain
with finite residue fields, which is where λ is defined at
all. So the dichotomy is the characteristic — equal against mixed —
and what varies within the locking side is ramification and nothing
else. That is the same local invariant the
module law states from the other
end: its eventually constant price
qe = pef is this gap's
cost, and its rank-∞ case is this unbounded gap.
Scope. The arithmetic half is a derivation
from the filtration, checked at the three worlds run. The measured
half is a rule in range: every place of norm ≤ 200 in two quadratic
number rings — 90 in all, 82 split, 5 inert, 3 ramified — read at
depths 1..24, the tail gap equalling the ramification index at 90 of
90, 1 at every split and inert place and 2 at every ramified one,
0 off; beside three function-field degrees whose gap is already 16
by depth 24. Three of the 90 carry a LEADING stretch of wider gaps,
and they are exactly the three with p − 1 ≤ e — the
depths below e/(p−1), where the principal units are
still squaring rather than stepping. The stop location is measured
at 2, 2, 3, 5 against products 1, 2, 3, 5 at gaps 1, 2, 3 and 5,
exact at three and floored at the fourth — measured in the abstract
schedule, where a gap can be dialled, and not in a ring. The stop
law is a
COMPARISON of two curves — a bounded recurrent price against an
opening cost that grows in the degree — and where openings never get
dearer a bounded gap stops nothing.
verifiers:
explore_tick_pump.py,
explore_lock_budget.py
A ring is a schedule of exactly that kind rather than an analogue
of one: its unramified places carry gap 1 and its ramified ones gap
e in the same run, and a place's price in a populated state
equals its own lone-place price at 472 of 472 readings. So a ring's
places do not share one gap, and the recurrent cost everything else is
priced against is then the least PRODUCT of a seated place's degree
with its own gap — not the least gap. A gap-3 place at degree 1 holds
that slot against every gap-1 place above degree 3, while a single
gap-1 place at the least degree freezes an entire wide population. And
a wide place cannot simply wait for a cheap depth: its gap falls back
to 1 only at its own set's members, and the depths it can reach miss
every one of them after the first step, so its cheap move comes
exactly once. That one move is what mixing adds to the limit, and it
is the strand.
What this dichotomy decides at the level of the machine — the same
apparatus read as a computation, its depth face one borrow short of
Turing-complete and its element face universal bare — is the
Computation section.