[{"type":"thinking","thinking":"Committed at 13:58. Session has been very productive. Time to report and suggest the next step. Task 1.3 proper is the third-moment failure analysis — heavier analytic work. It's 2pm; not near 5pm. The session's been long — offer the choice: continue to 1.3 proper or break. Give brief summary.","signature":""},{"type":"text","text":"**Thread T1 closed** (committed `bf334ac`). Standing in the project right now:\n\n**Session 001 tally:**\n- Phase 0: **complete** (6/6 tasks)\n- Task 1.1: **complete** — ceiling re-derived, non-tightness inventory (D-009)\n- Graveyard opened: **G-001** (Idea C) + zero-density variant — both with clean, citable obstructions\n- Thread T1: **closed** — sine moments + Christoffel reproduced (D-010, E-004)\n- 14 commits, all artifacts in SQLite + git, zero unrecoverable state\n\n**Next up is task 1.3 proper** — the analytic core: exactly where does the diagonal method fail for tr G̃³ at X ≍ T? This is the paper's own identified wall (Rudnick–Sarnak), and the question is whether any *fragment* survives unconditionally. It's focused pen-and-paper analysis building on D-004's machinery.\n\nIt's 1:58 PM. Continue into 1.3 proper, or take a break here? (If we continue and approach 5:00 PM with work still running, I'll flag it per the protocol.)"}]