# C805 — Regenerate the literal jubilee timestamps

## Question

Do the source surface dates follow one49-year ordinal encoding?

## Inputs

```json
{}
```

## Sources

```json
[
  "File20 lines889–890,923–925,1135"
]
```

## Opened utc

2026-09-28T02:08:20.347994+00:00

## Results

```json
{
  "encoded_dates": {
    "path": "model/BJ_jubilee_encoding.json",
    "sha256": "e1a613ce3600ce29177bc774545c012d7b62b0156d5ebd99bd97cda14367f2ee",
    "bytes": 795
  },
  "formula": "AM=49(j−1)+7(w−1)+y; BC=3857−AM"
}
```

## Finding

All six supplied timestamps regenerate under the49-year jubilee encoding. Macro50 in2450=50×49 counts jubilees; it does not change their unit length. The surface discrepancies therefore remain tied to an internally reproducible ledger.

## Reassessment

Recover both460-year bookends on the whole2450 path.

## Checks

```json
{
  "all_six": true,
  "fifty_unit_fails": true
}
```

## Closed utc

2026-09-28T02:08:20.348659+00:00

## Record provenance

Exact record hash: `c202f013d16573dbd9d71cd7c5d4dce701f19a0a388931e520640b5f250dedc8`

Source journal: `Research_Cycles/C0732_C0831/journal.json`