01From observation to structure
In FBM, structure is primitive and geometry is a projection of structure. This is the direction of theoretical explanation. An observation can prompt the research question; explaining it requires returning to the declared structure and the conditions that make the projection possible.
We observe a mechanical system moving and record a trace. What does that record allow us to know about the system? Which conditions constrained it, which contacts participated, and what alternative behaviour was possible?
Frame-Bound Mechanics organises inquiry around the relationship between declared structure, admissibility and observable output. The question has two parts: which structure are we examining, and what evidence supports our interpretation of it?
The order in which we gather evidence and the theoretical priority of structure are different matters. A trace leads to questions about structure; its geometry does not by itself define that structure.
Source: Corpus Manifest v1.0, §§1–2, p. 2 · §13, p. 7 ↗
Structural priority: Constraint Theory of Frame-Bound Mechanical Systems, Axiomatic Core, Axiom 2 — Constraint Primacy ↗. For the projection/identity distinction: Manifest §10.
02A first map of the concepts
The Theoretical Monograph connects fixed reference structure with active constraints, admissibility, dominance organisation and mechanical regimes. For an initial reading, these concepts can become questions:
| Concept | A question for inquiry |
|---|---|
| Reference structure | Within which declared structure is the system described? |
| Constraints | Which conditions restrict its states, and which of them are active? |
| Admissibility | Which states are compatible with the declared constraints? |
| Dominance | How is the influence of constraints organised? |
| Regime | How does behaviour relate to the active organisation of constraints? |
This map helps us read the concepts together. Their precise definitions and relationships are developed in the Theoretical and Mathematical Monographs.
03Projection and structural identity
An observable output provides information about a system, but the scope of that information needs examination. The Manifest distinguishes projection from structural identity. Identical traces alone do not establish that two systems have the same structure.
04What the Atlas contributes
The Atlas Monograph is the empirical root of the corpus in the domain of mechanical articulators. It connects the study of traces with dominance distribution, contact continuity, friction, regime classification and structural validation.
Each image or record therefore comes with a broader question: what information is needed alongside the trace to support its mechanical interpretation? The Atlas provides a starting point for studying how the theoretical language relates to a specific domain of observation.
Transferring conclusions to another domain requires its own argument and evidence.
05How to read a structural claim
A useful reading habit is to distinguish three things: what is declared about the system, what was observed and which conclusion the available evidence supports.
Among other distinctions, the Manifest separates compatibility from attribution to a particular structure, and internal validation from agreement with physical reality. A result that appears successful does not automatically validate the structure that produced it.
Study can then progress from an introductory explanation to precise formulations and to an assessment of the relevant evidence. Each claim remains connected to its source, its domain and the evidence supporting it.
06Three routes into the sources
- 01 / Theoretical Monograph ↗
If you are new to FBM, begin with the relationship between admissibility, constraints, projection, regimes and transitions.
- 02 / Mathematical Monograph ↗
For formal development: configuration objects, constraint families, admissible sets, interaction functionals, equilibrium operators and regime partitions.
- 03 / Atlas Monograph ↗
For the empirical domain: articulators, trace behaviour and its structural interpretation.
The three routes connect, but serve different questions. The appropriate citation is the source that supports the particular claim; there is no need for every text to cite all three automatically.
Source: Corpus Manifest v1.0, §§3.1–3.3, pp. 2–3 · §6, p. 4 ↗
SALIKOPOULOS, PANAGIOTIS. 2026. Frame-Bound Mechanics Corpus: Canonical Monograph Layer — Manifest v1.0. Zenodo. DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.19956502.