The Obviously Real Canon is a working framework: robust and directionally sound, refined under adversarial testing. Changes to formal arguments are recorded here so readers can see what moved, what didn’t, and why.

Change types:

• Clarification — wording made more precise; no change to what is claimed.
• Addition — new corollary or derivation; existing claims unchanged.
• Revision — an existing claim changed.
• Annotation — a note added to a document; its text is unchanged.

Each entry notes whether the deductive chain P0–P6 is affected.

---

v1.2 — 2026-10-17

Deductive chain P0–P6: unchanged.

Addition — P3.2 Defense

New defense page for P3.2. Addresses: modality as non-temporal, relativity of simultaneity, indeterministic block universes, future contingents, classical theism, and the relation to IR 9.

Clarification — IR 9 (time-neutral formulation)

Specifies that IR 9’s time-neutrality concerns physical time, and states the limit P3.2 imposes: the orientation cannot be preserved over a completed totality. Removes an apparent conflict between IR 9’s neutrality and P3.2/C4.

Clarification — C5 Defense (“feels emotions”)

Qualified to “as humans do,” with reference to P4.2’s hybrid account of emotion. Removes an apparent conflict with IR 12, which attributes valence to the Ground.

Annotation — Claude Analysis

Noted that the temporal question raised about C4 is addressed in v1.1.

v1.1 — 2026-10-16

Deductive chain P0–P6: unchanged.

Addition — P3.2 Actualization Is Ongoing

Makes explicit a step P3 relied on but did not state: operative constraint across alternatives requires that actualization be unfinished, because constraint over a settled whole collapses into description. Closes the eternalist reading under which P3’s "real possibility" could be accepted in a deflated sense.

Revision — C4 The Ground (temporality)

Previously: "Its integrative capacity is complete relative to all actuality, not sequential or deliberative."

Now: the Ground is extratemporal (unbounded by time, not timeless), with sequential experience following from P3.2. Distinguishes capacity (invariant), orientation (invariant), and state (changes). Clarifies that registering new actuality is not learning, and that differential weight in the Ground’s experience reflects preference, not limited attention.

Reason: the prior wording conflicted with P3.2 and with the valence and preference work in IR 9–12. Resolves the temporal tension flagged in the Claude Analysis document.

Clarification — C5 Defense

"non-temporal" → "extratemporal (unbounded by time, though sequential in experience; see C4)" for consistency with C4.

Clarification — Summary of Key Claims

Updated to reflect P3.2 and revised C4.