Scope, evidence, and the three levels of the claim

The architecture is

Here $c$ is a memory oscillator, $Q$ is a finite binary register, and $F$ contains raw words, decoded values, and declared failures.

Three levels are kept separate.

{}1.15

The capture port is a one-dimensional Markov input–output model. It is not identified with a local detector coupled to the massless scalar on Schwarzschild. In particular, its two-sided temporal envelope includes auxiliary degrees of freedom that are not negative-energy modes of that scalar field.

Our model uses explicitly available number-selective control Hamiltonians. This is a declared control set, not a claim that a dispersive oscillator–qubit laboratory automatically implements those Hamiltonians. General oscillator-control constructions Krastanov do not supply a compiler or a leakage certificate for the pulses constructed below.

Local system–probe measurement theory requires a separate spacetime coupling and an induced-observable identification FewsterVerch. No theorem below supplies that missing correspondence.

boundary. The arguments are analytical. Compilation, formal verification, numerical pulse optimization, parameter calibration, and laboratory execution are not asserted. “Certified” means that the displayed implications have stated hypotheses and mathematical proofs.

and distances. We use $c=\hslash =k_B=1$, $G>0$, and

A channel on trace-class operators is understood as the predual of a normal completely positive unital map when its input is infinite dimensional. All operational comparisons retain finite spectators and arbitrary finite-dimensional external references. The mathematical identities also hold for normal extensions to separable reference spaces.

status. Em03-A and Landmark I are used through the supplied text Em03A,LandmarkI. Their proofs and registry status are not independently verified here. Other internal manuscript names are not formal premises of the apparatus construction.