C714 — Unify the partial-conversion bridges

Question

Can one retained-fraction equation describe the old and new interfaces?

Inputs

{
  "rule": "effective(k,f)=1+(k−1)f",
  "cases": [
    [
      "E",
      "1/6",
      "P"
    ],
    [
      "E",
      "1/26",
      "J"
    ],
    [
      "P",
      "23/30",
      "91/90"
    ],
    [
      "E",
      "23/30",
      "16/15"
    ]
  ]
}

Sources

[
  "C631 partial-expansion results; C713"
]

Opened utc

2026-09-28T01:21:54.528322+00:00

Results

{
  "cases": [
    {
      "key": "25/23",
      "converted_fraction": "1/6",
      "effective": "70/69",
      "target": "70/69"
    },
    {
      "key": "25/23",
      "converted_fraction": "1/26",
      "effective": "300/299",
      "target": "300/299"
    },
    {
      "key": "70/69",
      "converted_fraction": "23/30",
      "effective": "91/90",
      "target": "91/90"
    },
    {
      "key": "25/23",
      "converted_fraction": "23/30",
      "effective": "16/15",
      "target": "16/15"
    }
  ]
}

Finding

One retained-fraction law explains four interfaces: partialE can equal wholeP or wholeJ, and the newly supplied23/30 upper component generates the two macro calendar ratios. The source partition remains the premise that licenses each chronological use.

Reassessment

Separate this duration law from the extra anchor condition needed for endpoint agreement.

Checks

{
  "all_four": true,
  "fractions_valid": true
}

Closed utc

2026-09-28T01:21:54.528635+00:00

Record provenance

Exact record hash: b25c9fcae07ef36f494c6880ff7e5f2823e4470e576ecd04fbc444a8fa3df804

Source journal: Research_Cycles/C0632_C0731/journal.json