# Coherence value lattice — preserved design proposal Accepted direction, 26 September 2026. This proposal belongs to a separate experiment alongside the original cosmic lattice, the physics comparison, and the unified scalar–electromagnetic lattice. It does not authorize replacing their models or rewriting Paper XI. ## Purpose Expand people's practical freedom to live securely, care, learn, create and pursue interests they choose. Monetary coordination serves access to resources and opportunity; it is not an end in itself or a measure of human worth. Support cooperation without conformity, and distribute decision-making power as well as resources. The large monetary number, where meaningful, concerns what many more people might become free to do, not what one person gets to possess. Compassion, clarity, mutual support and well-being are desired outcomes to investigate, not quantities inferred from an attractive animation. ## The complete design direction An interactive, time-evolving lattice connects the field, money, resources, opportunities and decision-making power without confusing them. Paper XI's coherence and screening proposal supplies the mathematical starting point. New connections to accounts, resources and agency must be declared assumptions. - People are equal-sized, persistent nodes. Wealth does not enlarge their human importance. Resting does not remove their identity or essential eligibility. - Resources and facilities have distinct symbols: housing, food supplies, care capacity, tools, workshops, gardens and energy. - Projects represent things people choose to pursue, including ordinary interests without a profit requirement. - Connections represent actual access, payments, cooperation, knowledge sharing or decision rights. Decorative geometry is not a transaction. - People can join several projects, leave, explore another interest or have no active project. No forced central node or common ambition is required. ## Six views of the same world - Coherence and screening: model field, local density, coupling and screening, with defined quantities. Coherence is never a score of someone's goodness, obedience or social worth. - Money: holdings, reserves, accounted transfers and any explicitly defined issuance or retirement. In the initial implementation currency is conserved; no issuance or retirement mechanism is supplied. - Basic security: needs, availability, delivery and missing or delayed access. Eligibility does not depend on exceptional performance or popularity. - Real resources: finite materials or service capacity, facilities, available time, replenishment and ecological constraints. The first implementation uses declared service capacities, not a validated production or ecological model. - Opportunity and knowledge: selected projects, prerequisites, shared discoveries and which possibilities become feasible. - Agency and governance: ownership, administration, approval, vetoes, ways to challenge decisions and replacement of stewards. A low-balance person may still control essentials. ## Follow an opportunity A workshop gives someone access to space and tools; a repair skill helps restore equipment; usable equipment can enable somebody else's garden. Each link should identify the changed resource or knowledge, payments, participants' choices, unmet prerequisites, creator benefit and any lasting dependence. Only display a causal sequence when the corresponding modeled events occur. Sharing information does not itself create materials, labor or currency. Knowledge can benefit its creator without requiring exclusivity. Existing research-source release boundaries remain separate. ## Principles become rules and failure criteria - Basic security independent of performance: entitlement is unconditional, but supply and funding must be accounted for. Do not set needs-met indicators to true by decree. - Diversity: difference, disagreement and unconventional interests are not defects to eliminate. Coherence must not mean conformity. - Voluntary participation: resting, leaving, exploring several interests, changing direction and failing must not remove basic eligibility. - Ordinary life: care, art, repair, gardens, wildlife, community activity and enjoyment belong alongside scientific innovation. No competitive ranking of human worth. - Legitimate saving and ownership: distinguish future reserves and a comfortable life from concentrated control that restricts other people's essentials. Facility resources are not automatically personal hoards. - Stewardship: voice, accountability, understandable reasons, appeals and replacement must be visible. Distributing money while retaining an unchecked veto is not distributing power. - Harm-related oversight: address exploitation, coercion, fraud and deliberate harm with evidence and contestability, not opinions, unfamiliar ideas or presumed virtue. - Open outcomes: the system may fail. Scarcity, lost access, concentration or inadequate safeguards must remain visible. ## Mathematical and financial separation Keep nominal monetary balances, screening-adjusted output/coupling and actual resource capacity separate. A weaker link is not an accounted transfer, a legal change in ownership or proof of a holdings ceiling. Every transfer needs a debit, credit, reason and round. Every field effect needs a specified rule. Rendering never chooses the result. ## Test panel Replay identical initial conditions and events while varying a mechanism. Include rest, a failed project, legitimate savings, shared knowledge, resource scarcity, monetary concentration, capture of authority without wealth and a challenge to a false restriction. Track access, choice and power, not just total value, transaction counts or balance equality. ## First implementation Use a small synthetic community, 50–100 participants, several project spaces and resource pools. Provide a stable central lattice, six views, play/pause/step/replay, an entity inspector, event traces, accountable transfers, scenario controls, same-seed comparisons, browser-local saved runs and downloadable records. Provide a companion paper explaining the move from Paper XI's original standpoint to explicit modeled assumptions and the human-purpose requirements. Keep it unnumbered and distinct from the preserved corpus. Attach the full proposal rather than silently replacing it with a smaller specification. ## Initial implementation boundary The first model uses 72 fictional participants, six projects, five finite service providers, a periodic 12 × 6 abstract field and at most 180 dimensionless rounds. Resource capacities, budgets, honoraria, project outcomes, review rules and the field-to-work mapping are declared choices. The overview starts paused after one computed round. Knowledge sharing, ordinary reserve saving, voluntary project membership, nonparticipation, finite service delivery, output screening, recorded transfers, control capture, appeals and steward replacement are executable. They are not real money, actual votes, observations of society or physical validation. Material production chains, land/property law, actual financial clearing, empirical coherence measurement, privacy-preserving live participation, ecological impact measurement and measured well-being require later research and implementation. These limits do not remove their purposes from the proposal. Do not claim that this bounded model demonstrates a complete economy or replaces the full framework.