fpf.tools
Library / First Principles Framework (FPF) - Core Conceptual Specification
Jump to passage
In this reading
Source · lines 61457–61466

Link to current text

Published source confirmed at last check

Source changed 2026-10-03 11:52:20 UTC · snapshot created 2026-10-03 11:53:41 UTC · last check 2026-10-03 13:45:10 UTC

C.26:3 - Forces

ForceTension
Ordinary FPF patterns firstC.11, A.6, F.9, A.15, C.25, C.16, A.10, B.3, C.18, C.19, and A.19 already govern the corresponding ordinary questions. QL wording must add only the remaining state, probe, or export cue.
Lightweight use vs claims requiring additional evidenceA recognition or conditional comparison can remain small. A prediction, model-adoption or comparative-performance claim may need support that the earlier use did not require; reuse adequate existing support.
Useful math vs misleading vocabularyQuantum-like formalisms help with order, contextual probability, incompatible probes, instruments, and open information systems; popular quantum words easily overclaim.
Representation cost vs representation lossA cheaper state representation may be the right engineering move, but only if the source, shortcut, loss, admissible use, and reopen condition stay visible.
Recognition vs assuranceWorking readers need fast entry; the assurance section needs enough typed fields to prevent the lens from taking over neighboring pattern work, impossible-copy overread, and hidden ontology.