root law: hierarchy is the address space, not the ontology (+ the probe that finds its boundary)

.claude/board/EPIPHANIES.md

@@ -1,3 +1,160 @@
+## 2026-08-23 — E-HIERARCHY-IS-THE-ADDRESS-SPACE-NOT-THE-ONTOLOGY-1 — HHTL is the universal address grammar, beneath the V3/V4 distinction; and globality is geometry ONLY WITH provenance
+
+**Status:** ROOT LAW proposed by the operator, with one part [MEASURED]
+and one part [CONJECTURE] — the split is stated below rather than blurred.
+**Confidence:** High for the address-space law and the measured corollary;
+the universal-addressability claim is explicitly NOT demonstrated for
+`Belief`.
+
+### The law (operator, 2026-08-23)
+
+> **Hierarchy is the address space, not the ontology.**
+>
+> HHTL need not claim that reality is a tree. It claims that every resident
+> datum can receive a hierarchical address FROM WHICH non-hierarchical
+> relations can be expressed **without changing its physical identity — and
+> zero-copy where the carrier is ABI-resident.**
+
+**Why that qualifier is exact, not hedging.** Hierarchical addressability
+by itself guarantees nothing about copies; the PHYSICAL ABI does. An
+address over a non-resident carrier (an owned container, a materialized
+window) is still an address, and it is still not zero-copy — which is
+precisely the `WitnessStream` situation recorded in its own honesty note.
+Keeping the two clauses separate stops the law from silently importing a
+performance guarantee it does not itself supply.
+
+The Active Directory lesson, exactly. A DN gives an object a deterministic
+hierarchical home —
+`CN=Jan,OU=Engineering,DC=example,DC=com` — without asserting that
+everything about Jan is ancestry. Group membership, manager links, ACLs and
+mail routing are cross-links between objects that already have hierarchical
+identities. The directory hierarchy solves **where**; the references solve
+**how things relate**.
+
+```
+  EVERY COGNITIVE DATUM GETS AN HHTL HOME.
+
+  Relations may then: inherit · cross-link · point sideways · backward ·
+  forward · contradict · support · cause · observe · intervene
+  — without changing the object's addressability.
+```
+
+**What this corrects (a narrowness in my own prior caution).** The earlier
+entry `E-STREAM-ORDER-VS-PREFIX-TREE-NEITHER-ACCUMULATES-1` framed
+"stream-order Markov" and "prefix-tree HHTL" as an opposition. Under this
+law that opposition is **weaker than it was stated** — see that entry's own
+regrade note. A temporal datum is not a separate non-HHTL universe; it can
+be HHTL-addressed (`episode → version window → event region → event
+identity`) with the signed ±i4 offsets as LOCAL traversal inside an
+addressed neighborhood. Stream ordering remains temporal semantics; HHTL
+gives it its home. The two are layered, not rival. Same for graphs: a node
+has a canonical HHTL home while edges are `address A → address B`, and the
+graph itself needs no tree structure at all — AriGraph, `CausalEdge`,
+`EpisodicEdge`, anaphora pointers, support/premise relations and R2IL
+operations can all point between HHTL-resident things.
+
+### HHTL is BENEATH the V3/V4 distinction
+
+```
+                 HHTL ADDRESS SPACE
+                       │
+         ┌─────────────┼─────────────┐
+        V3            V3            V4
+      state         witness       behavior
+         │             │             │
+     ClassView     ClassView     ClassView
+         │             │             │
+  route semantics  route semantics  route semantics
+```
+
+V3 and V4 do not own the railway. They are payload/read contracts for
+objects that **already have a hierarchical home**. This is a cleaner
+statement than the earlier "V4 may ride V3 routes" framing.
+
+### The brutal admission rule (the sharp test this gives us)
+
+> **If a datum exists but cannot be assigned a meaningful HHTL address
+> without using `Vec` position as identity, it has not yet been normalized
+> into the memory ABI.**
+
+This names precisely what was wrong with the withdrawn "trivial
+per-arena-position address" proposal (`BELIEF-ABI-RESTORATION-1` Step 1,
+recut): **`arena[37]` is not a semantic hierarchy — it is an implementation
+accident wearing an HHTL costume.** A real address would land through
+semantic coordinates (relation class → subject basin → predicate basin →
+evidence context → instance; exact carving to be PROVEN, not invented).
+
+### The corollary, and where it breaks — [MEASURED]
+
+> **Evidence rises only as high in the HHTL tree as its independent support
+> generalizes.**
+
+The prize is deleting a metadata system: no `enum Scope {Local, Regional,
+Global}`, no global-concern score, no scheduler that "promotes" a belief.
+Globality becomes geometry. `PROBE-EVIDENCE-RISES-BY-GENERALIZATION-1`
+(7/7) measured it on shipped operators:
+
+- **[CODE]** The pieces already exist and were not written for this:
+  `AttentionFocusFacet::common_prefix` is the MEET (deepest focus covering
+  both, and it *never invents an address*); `RowFocusMask` is literally
+  "antichain of HHTL regions" with absorbing `union` and conservative
+  `difference`; `TruthValue::revise` (`nars/truth.rs:57`) pools by
+  `evidence_weight() = c/(1−c)`.
+- **[MEASURED]** Support rises exactly as far as it generalizes (G1 one
+  basin stays local; G2 three independent siblings rise to the common
+  ancestor with pooled `c=0.9444 > 0.85`; G6 cross-region support rises
+  COARSER, never sideways), the operator can refuse (G7: no common ancestor
+  across classes ⇒ `None`), a dissenting region stays ADDRESSABLE instead
+  of being averaged away (G4), and nothing moves (G5: children byte-
+  identical; the parent acquires a derived reading at an address that
+  already existed — **children stay, parent learns**).
+- **⚠ [MEASURED] THE BOUNDARY — G3.** *Geometry alone over-generalizes.*
+  One source observed through three sibling basins pools naively to
+  `c=0.9444` — **bit-identical to three genuinely independent sources.**
+  The two situations are *geometrically indistinguishable*. So:
+
+  > `globality = geometry` is TRUE **only with provenance**.
+
+  This is not a caveat, it is the load-bearing constraint: the hard problem
+  was never aggregation (NARS already revises correctly) but **independence
+  detection** — are these siblings independent evidence, or descendants of
+  one observation? That is exactly what `Stamp`'s `disjoint → revise /
+  overlap → CHOICE` guard protects today, and `spo::truth`'s revision doc
+  already states the precondition verbatim: *"combine two truth values with
+  **independent** evidence."*
+
+### The correct decomposition (with the operator's own correction applied)
+
+```
+  NARS frequency   observed proportion / effect estimate
+  NARS confidence  effective evidence mass  ← NOT frequency
+  HHTL address     the scope at which it holds
+  HHTL ancestry    how far that support generalizes
+```
+
+Frequency alone is not sample count; `evidence_weight() = c/(1−c)` in the
+shipped `revise` confirms confidence is the evidence-mass side.
+
+### [CONJECTURE] — stated as such
+
+That **every** cognitive datum CAN receive a lawful HHTL address is not
+demonstrated. For `Belief` specifically the audit found the opposite of a
+demonstration: zero `FacetCascade`/`facet_classid` occurrences anywhere in
+`nars/`. The law says such an address is *possible in principle*; whether
+the semantic carving exists for beliefs is open, and is the real content of
+`BELIEF-ABI-RESTORATION-1` Step 2. Nothing here mints a tenant, an address,
+or a classid.
+
+**One consequence worth recording if the conjecture holds:** attention
+would need no foreign mask representation at all — `Attention = set /
+antichain / scoped difference of HHTL regions` is `RowFocusMask` as it
+already ships; epistemic potholes become scoped ABSENCE within an addressed
+universe (still the conservative P* reading, `RowFocusMask::difference`
+keeps partially-overlapped entries whole); and R2IL applicability points
+into the same coordinate grammar. `DATA` has an address, `ATTENTION` is
+region selection, `UNKNOWN` is scoped absence, `BEHAVIOR` has applicability
+routes, `PROVENANCE` points to evidence, `CAUSALITY` links resident state —
+and C operates on the surviving addressed slices.
 ## 2026-08-23 — E-STREAM-ORDER-VS-PREFIX-TREE-NEITHER-ACCUMULATES-1 — the two closest shipped candidates for the belief tree-overlay delegation are different topologies, and NEITHER implements an accumulate-fold
 
 **Status:** FINDING (grounds and sharpens the `BELIEF-ABI-RESTORATION-1`