The classical papers are comparisons, not hidden premises

XIX-A labelled four time-related objects and supplied classical separation calculations XIXA. XIX-B excluded one specified direct comparison of VI's unswitched first coordinate coefficient with XVI-D's prepared candidate XIXB. XIX-C analyzed finite incidence interfaces and their failure to determine a continuum evolution XIXC.

None of their detecting witnesses is imported into a quantum calculation in this paper. Where an elementary principle is needed, it is proved below.

The direct mismatch of XIX-B does not show that VI lacks its own harmonic coordinate prescription. It shows that one declared map does not identify that prescription with another candidate. Consequently, there is no common coordinate field inherited through that comparison. An independent quantum construction of either native object remains a different possible undertaking.

Similarly, finite-register non-determination does not show that finite quantum channels are absent. XIX-C explicitly defines complete finite channel realizations. The missing target is a specified continuum or autonomous physical evolution of the incidence package, not the existence of every finite quantum update.