# RULINGS BATCH 1 — the seven highest-leverage questions (2026-08-31)

The wiring campaign's dispatch layer is complete (2,254 distinct papers). The
remaining ledger is 246 papers carrying OPEN_RULING / OPEN_UQFF_DERIVATION_TARGET
markers — ALL Daniel-gated (plus PAPER_1950's OPEN_CANDIDATE, a standing
falsifiable prediction awaiting observation, which needs no ruling) by charter design ("Daniel answers in batches").
This file condenses the multi-paper clusters so one answer clears many papers.
Answering B1-B7 is estimated to clear ~35-40 of the 246 on the next fold pass.
Full question texts: RULINGS_QUEUE.md (each Q-tag section).

Answer format (one line suffices), e.g.:
    B1: D2   B2: G   B3: yes / yes / 2muB-form   B4: 1.411e15   B5: <rule>   B6: 15   B7: yes

## B1 — Q-008 family: GW power/timescale scaling convention (clears the GW cluster)
Is radiated power scaled by the damping factor LINEARLY (PAPER_005: P_UQFF = F*P_GR)
or SQUARED (PAPER_008: P_UQFF = D^2*P_GR)? The corpus votes D^2 with four data
points (PAPER_008, 011 via Omega_GW ~ h^2, 012 modified Peters, 013 Edot = D_SCm^2*Edot_GR);
PAPER_005's linear form is the lone outlier. RECOMMENDED (corpus-derived): D^2
canonical; PAPER_005 gets a revision-note.

## B2 — Q-002: B_crit unit, T vs G (16 mention sites across ~10 papers)
PAPER_001 states B_crit = 4.4e13 T; PAPER_002 states 4.4e13 G (1e4 apart). The
registry composition D_phys*(SO_5+1)*SO_5^12 = 4.4e13 is dimensionless; the
scenario tables reproduce with GAUSS. Which unit is canonical?

## B3 — Q-230/231/232/234 + Q-224/237: the omega0=1e-12 Force Equivalence Class (~12 papers)
(i) Confirm the derived-correct DPM_resonance = 1.76e18 (PAPER_250; 1.76e19 for
PAPER_251 at B0=1e-4) and F_LENR = 6.17e39 versus the papers' stated 1.76e3/1.76e5
and 6.17e30 (systematic 15- and 9-order exponent drifts, mantissas correct).
(ii) Confirm F_U_Bi = +2.11e208 N as the SHARED founding benchmark of the class
(identical across PAPER_217 Branch-1, 237, 250, 251, 252, 254 — documented, not
reconstructable from stated components).
(iii) Adjudicate the DPM_resonance formula variant: PAPER_248's
g_H*mu_B*B0/(hbar*omega0)*adj_factor versus PAPER_250/251's 2*mu_B*B0/(hbar*omega0).

## B4 — Q-246/Q-248: canonical Cooper superconductive frequency (A_sc family)
f_super = 1.411e15 Hz (PAPER_295/302, stated in both bodies) or 1.411e16 Hz
(PAPER_316 requires the 10x value to reach A_sc = 6.994e21)? If 1.411e15, then
A_sc = 6.994e20 and PAPER_316's "confirmation" of the magnetar-branch 6.994e21
is spurious.

## B5 — Q-216: dimensional normalization of additive master-equation terms
PAPER_218/219/220 (and later system papers) add pressure (F_wind, Pa), field
(M_mag, T), and energy-density (E_rad, J/m^3) terms directly to g (m/s^2) with
an unstated "UQFF normalization". Is there a canonical conversion (divide by a
reference rho, a mass-per-area, ...), or should the master equation carry
explicit per-term conversion factors? One consolidated ruling settles the
whole fourth-pass family.

## B6 — Q-224(b): Eta Carinae mass, 15 vs 150 M_sun
Paper text says "~150 M_sun = 2.984e31 kg" but 150 M_sun = 2.984e32 kg. The CP3
worked example uses 2.984e31 (i.e., 15 M_sun) consistently, so the dispatch
wired 2.984e31 and flagged the label. Confirm: 2.984e31 (15 M_sun) or 2.984e32
(150 M_sun)?

## B7 — Q-220: PAPER_227 a_wind dispatch edit authorization
The physics is already resolved on record (PAPER_228: canonical ambient
rho_fluid = 1e-12 kg/m^3; PAPER_227's ABSTRACT value 4e3 m/s^2 was correct, its
sec-2 rho_fluid = 1e-21 giving 4e12 was the outlier). Per the self-rectification
doctrine the dispatch was NOT re-edited without your request. Authorize updating
PAPER_227's dispatch a_wind from 4e12 to 4e3 (rho_fluid 1e-21 -> 1e-12)?

## ANSWERS (Daniel, 2026-08-31)

B1: D^2 canonical. B2: Gauss. B3: confirm both + formulas domain-split.
B4: 1.411e15 Hz. B5: divide by reference rho x length (per-domain values ->
Q-216b). B6: 2.984e32 kg (150 M_sun). B7: yes, update to 4e3.

Folded same day: 8 dispatches RULED (PAPER_008/227/237/250/251/252/254/316);
ledger updated; backlog 246 -> 238 Daniel-gated. Full dispositions in
RULINGS_QUEUE.md "BATCH 1 RULINGS".

## VERIFICATION CORRECTION (2026-08-31, post-answers)

B1's framing ("PAPER_005 the lone linear outlier") was wrong — PAPER_005 L62
states P = F_combined^2 x P_GR explicitly. The D^2 ruling stands, unanimous.
Full audit: BATCH_1_VERIFICATION.md.
