Manuscript En05-A@1 · En05-A.tex · theorem · f076e703
Theorem: The strong closure also excludes ordinary relays
Two retiming statements and a boost-closure limitation › The earlier strong closure hypothesis · lines 1625–1643 · proof included or linked
En05-A@1#thm:boostobstruction
Hypothesis hyp:boost and E7(a) are incompatible with any bidirectional lossless one-tick transport between distinct sites, even when their distance is at most .
Proof. Let be such sites. Define and for . This function is -compatible for every metric because every difference of values is at most one.
The -image of the -to- step has duration zero. The -image of the -to- step also has duration zero. Unrestricted composition makes an admitted dependency cycle. Proposition prop:cyclecontradiction contradicts E7(a).
Nearby in this section
- section: The earlier strong closure hypothesis
- hypothesis: Hypothesis: Unrestricted device retiming closure
- assumption: Assumption: E7: Finite causal executability
- proposition: Proposition: Executability of admissible finite networks
- theorem: Theorem: Formal super-cone cycle construction
- section: The earlier strong closure hypothesis
- proposition: Proposition: Closed dependencies conflict with E7(a)
- remark: Remark: Correct conclusion