A.6.4:3 - Forces

• Different subject versus unsupported new claim. Changing the EntityOfConcern is permitted only when the receiving claims are conservative with respect to the declared invariant.
• Useful loss versus hidden loss. Retargeting may discard information, but the loss boundary and the use that tolerates it must be visible.
• Direct case versus universal apparatus. Use a domain relation, mathematical map, semantic Bridge, or diagram as current-case basis only when its own governor establishes the needed claim. Identify r from its endpoints, arrow rule or designator, and formal equivalence; judge q separately from exact current facts.
• Composition versus accidental equivalence. Compatible retargetings may compose. Equality of two evaluation routes, reversibility, idempotency, or semantic correspondence requires its own stated conditions; it does not follow from the word retargeting.
• Modularity. The retargeting arrow relates two epistemes, q states one bounded-use proposition, and a separate current-case judgement says whether the facts satisfy it, fail it, or leave it undecidable. Grounding, publication, Work, evidence, assurance, gate, flow structure, and cross-local-sense correspondence remain separate.