# Claim ledger

This ledger is editorial, not a measured confidence score. It prevents the
presentation from silently promoting an interpretation into an experimental result.

| ID | Claim | Classification | Basis or remaining obligation |
|---|---|---|---|
| C01 | Matthew supplied an empty-room image and requested a personal creative portrait. | Documented | Conversation and original image |
| C02 | The generated picture includes a patterned rug. | Visible in artwork | `room.png`; image prompt explicitly requested it |
| C03 | The inventory contains 72 entries, including the rug at 66. | Package fact | `inventory.json`, generated catalog and executable package checks |
| C04 | There are exactly 72 separate objects in the picture. | Not claimed | Grouped shelves, equipment and lights make that reading incorrect |
| C05 | The rug connects the room compositionally. | Aesthetic interpretation | Visual reading; no measured coherence score |
| C06 | The image prompt specified a Lebowski reference. | Contradicted by preserved prompt | It specified a rug but no film reference |
| C07 | Matthew recognized the reference and called the moment “emergent dudeism.” | Documented conversation | Preserved sequence in `EMERGENT_DUDEISM.md` |
| C08 | Later turns transformed earlier material into new shared context. | Descriptive observation | Image → inventory → recognition → named joke → repository |
| C09 | This establishes a specialized EFMW causal mechanism. | UNRESOLVED / unsupported here | No explicit EFMW implementation, comparative protocol or experiment |
| C10 | The rug proves a new physical interaction. | Satire when presented as Rug Theory | No scientific evidence; fictional laws are labeled |
| C11 | The source repositories contain bounded formal artifacts and open obligations. | Source-supported description | Inspected primary project documents in `SOURCES.md` |
| C12 | Those formal artifacts validate all EFMW physical claims. | Not established | Requires mathematical bridges and empirical evidence for each physical claim |
| C13 | The proof-like screen in the picture contains a verified proof. | Not established | Generated visual texture, no executable proof extracted |
| C14 | The imagined equipment is Matthew's actual property. | Not claimed | The image is a creative portrait |
| C15 | The small animal carvings can all be identified precisely. | Uncertain | Species-level readings are marked interpretive |
| C16 | The conversation establishes AI consciousness. | Unsupported | No relevant test or operational definition supplied |
| C17 | The original/generated pair isolates the rug's causal effect. | False experimental interpretation | Many objects, materials and lights changed together |
| C18 | The new repository's software checks passed. | See execution record | Exact commands and results in `VERIFICATION.md` |
| C19 | A hosted Dude Physics repository or Pages site was published. | Not done in this task | ZIP prepared for user upload; no remote publication |

## How to extend this ledger

Add a new claim before adding a new result. State the subject, the evidence, the
scope, and any missing bridge. Keep failed tests and open obligations visible.
If an image or narrative is doing the work, call the claim an interpretation.
If code is doing the work, record the executed version and command. If it is a
joke, leave the label attached when quoting it elsewhere.