# Erratum and status event — the Hubble prediction KS-45.1 has fired (2026-09-03) **Date:** 2026-09-03 (the ruling); recorded here 2026-09-04 **Author:** G · Studio G · the420code.org **Applies to:** `2026-08-02-H0-KS45.1.md` (frozen, never edited) and AP18 (*The Floor*, frozen) **Instrument of record:** `/proofs/instruments/AP18/ERRATUM_AP18_The_Floor_2026-09-03.md`, issued beside the frozen paper and confirmed by the author **Status:** frozen for commit. The commit hash is the timestamp. The registration of 2026-08-02 stands as written. It is not edited. This file stands beside it, in the house's way: corrections supersede, dated, in the open. --- ## 1. The status event > **KS-45.1 — H₀ = 74.3 ± 1.2 km/s/Mpc — FIRED, 3 September 2026.** It fired on the corpus's own derived rate. AP48 (*The Assembly*) closes the corpus's cosmology on one expansion rate, 67.45 km/s/Mpc, window 64.4–70.8 (`2026-09-04-H0-KS-ASM.1.md`). On the width KS-45.1 registered, 74.3 sits (74.3 − 67.45) / 1.2 = 5.7σ from that rate; folding in the corpus's own window, about two sigma. AP46 §9 had pre-registered on 2 September 2026 that if AP48 derived the standard age–rate relation, this switch or KS-STRETCH.3 would fire. The age stands; this was the edge. The disposition was ruled by the desk on the author's delegation and confirmed in the author's own word the same day: *fired*. Two dispositions were open — fired with erratum, or superseded by erratum unfired. The first was chosen for one reason: the house's law is that nothing fired is repaired, and re-sizing the width of a live switch after the corpus's own derivation has contradicted it, then not counting the switch as fired, would be a repair. The switch stays on the board as a corpse: shown, never repaired, never deleted. The corpus's H₀ entry is now KS-ASM.1. --- ## 2. The erratum on the width AP18 §5 tests the floor a₀ = C_S² · cH₀/(2π) against an empirical acceleration scale quoted as 1.20 ± 0.02 × 10⁻¹⁰ m/s², citing McGaugh et al. 2016 and Lelli et al. 2017, and §§7–8 invert the relation to H₀ = 74.3 ± 1.2. The ±0.02 is the random error alone. The sources cited give the scale as 1.20 ± 0.02 (random) ± 0.24 (systematic) × 10⁻¹⁰ m/s², the systematic arising from the stellar mass-to-light ratios and the distances. Propagated, the floor's inversion is **H₀ = 74.3 ± 14.9**, not ± 1.2. The relation cannot distinguish 67 from 74. The registration of 2026-08-02 said as much in its own §6 ("the ± 1.2 in the registered value is the optimistic branch") and registered the sharp width anyway; the sharp width is what fired. What this changes, in order: 1. **KS-45 stands, live.** The coefficient a₀/(cH₀) = 0.1662 sits at 0.46σ against the sky's 0.183 ± 0.037 at H₀ = 67.45. 2. **The floor survives as a relation.** At 67.45 it gives 1.089 × 10⁻¹⁰ m/s², 9.2% below the scale and 0.46σ on the honest error; across the corpus's window it stays between 0.24σ and 0.67σ. 3. **The symbol.** AP18 writes its geometric correction factor 2 ln(sec ½ + tan ½) ≈ 1.0445 as α; the symbol collides with the fine-structure constant. The site, the registry and the glossary write it C_S²; the papers follow at their next revision. 4. **Nothing in AP18's derivation of the form or the coefficient moves.** What moves is the width of one number and the name of one symbol. --- ## 3. The scoreboard line, re-read The 2 August scoreboard recorded the Hubble line as a landing at 0.55σ against the April 2026 distance-network value. That landing was an artefact of the missing systematic. The line now reads: the corpus's H₀ is a closure at 67.45, window 64.4–70.8, KS-ASM.1 live; the old line is shown fired. Ø Predictions, the flagship book, printed both widths in its Part IV — "sharp at 2% and soft at 20%," 74 ± 15 at the soft level — and 67.45 sits inside the soft one. The book is not edited: it becomes the record of what was wrong. The sharp prediction fired; the soft one holds; the registration was the error. --- *Frozen files are never edited; corrections supersede, dated, in the open.* *Copyleft 2026. Don't be a cunt. Be kind.*