Why Full-Physics Candor Builds Trust
Stating the gates plainly is a design choice: a technical reader trusts a study that names its limits over one that hides them.
The candor position
Aegis is presented at full-physics candor: the four gates are stated with their exact magnitudes, worst cases included. This is deliberate. A design study that hides its limits cannot be checked, and a claim that cannot be checked cannot be trusted.
What candor forgoes and gains
- It forgoes the easy headline of a near-term breakthrough
- It buys a design a technical reader can audit
- It makes progress legible: a shrinking gate is real evidence
- It distinguishes this study from unfalsifiable claims
Consistency across the site
The same figures appear on every relevant page, frozen under change control. No page softens a gate that another page states. Candor is only credible if it is uniform.
Full-physics candor forgoes the easy headline of a near-term breakthrough in favour of something more durable: a design a technical reader can audit and re-check. The four gates appear with identical magnitudes on every relevant page, worst cases included, because a caveat that softens from one page to the next is not candor at all. Progress, in this frame, is a gate that visibly shrinks.