In the framework, measurable geometry belongs to the System Frame. Extending the realized spatial construction to a time-oriented Lorentzian geometry requires stated causal and regularity conditions. A spatial count relation alone does not establish that extension.

The proposed Informativity differential is a different element of the theory. It describes a count-dependent normalization and is not a velocity-driven contraction. A journalist should not merge those two mechanisms simply because both can affect language about length.

The same caution applies to astronomical applications. A nonrelativistic, weak-field rotation-curve law can be tested against stellar velocities without already supplying the complete relativistic geometry needed to predict all forms of light deflection. Success in one calculation does not automatically validate the other.

Recovering known behavior matters because a foundational proposal must not lose established limits. But reproduction and discrimination are separate tests. The first asks whether the framework remains consistent where existing theories work; the second asks whether it makes a different measurable prediction.

This release emphasizes scope rather than announcing a new clock experiment. The cited source record supports a structured research program, with conditions attached to its reductions and distinct calculations needed for particular observables. Reporting those conditions makes the scientific claim more useful and more falsifiable than a general statement that relativity has been replaced.