Invariance-to-conservation necessity

Current approved assessment

Evidence position

METHOD / BOUNDARY

Review depth

BASELINE SURVEY

Evidence movement

Initial observation — no prior comparable baseline linked

Conditional formal route established nearby; exact programme necessity unassessed. Do not display ordinary conservation evidence as ladder confirmation.

Why it sits here

This is a derivational audit question. Noether supplies a rigorous nearby mathematical result for variational problems with specified transformation groups and regularity assumptions [S58]. That established result does not demonstrate that the ladder supplies an action, appropriate symmetries, or physically applicable equations. The supplied candidate contains no such derivation.

Principal uncertainty

Missing definitions, assumptions and derivational text prevent deciding validity or circularity; absence of this material is not a demonstrated counterexample.

What would change the view?

A versioned proof with explicit premises, physical interpretation, boundary assumptions and a bounded comparator would justify reconsideration.

Launch-v1 depth

Baseline-only public wrapper. No deeper evidence artefacts are fabricated.

Approved history