Axiom Mapping

{S, B, R, C} → A1–A6: How the 420 Code axioms project onto human-scale physics

AP02’s six axioms are independently justified from standard physics. They are also structural projections of the argument’s four axioms {S, B, R, C} onto the scale of embodied agents. The mapping is:

A1 (Energy conserved) ← Axiom C (Constraint). Axiom C imposes a finite invariant bound on the manifold. Conservation of energy is the human-scale expression of this bound.

A2 (Time irreversible) ← Axiom R (Records are irreversible). Axiom R states that every actualisation writes a definite, irreversible record. Entropic drift is the human-scale expression of this irreversibility.

A3 (Substrates finite) ← Axiom C (Constraint). Finite propagation speed and compactification at the 0-pole imply that all physical substrates are bounded. Finite capacity is the human-scale projection.

A4 (Decay without maintenance) ← Axiom B + R. The break creates records; records degrade without energy input because the manifold is under tension (AP17). Structural decay is the human-scale expression.

A5 (Noisy observation) ← Axiom B. The break is the minimum viable distinction. Observation is inherently granular because it IS the break — each measurement is an actualisation event with finite resolution.

Perfect observation would require an infinitely fine break, which contradicts Axiom B.

A6 (Absorbing ruin) ← Axiom C. Compactification at the 0-pole creates event horizons (AP08). An event horizon is an absorbing state: once crossed, no return is possible.

Ruin as absorbing failure is the human-scale projection of the horizon.

This mapping is structural, not a dependency. AP02 does not require {S, B, R, C} to be true. A1–A6 stand on their own empirical foundation.

But if {S, B, R, C} are true (as AP20 proves), then A1–A6 are necessary consequences — the argument forces exactly these constraints on any embodied agent operating on the manifold.