The port asked whether the PRESS (A) plate pulses and with what period,
framing it as "does the timeline loop at 244 or does something else drive
it". Both halves of that disjunction are wrong about ptbtn00.
ptbtn00 ramps, holds, extinguishes at t=244 and stays out. The pulse is
ptbtn00f -- the plate's focus/glow variant, reached through focus_link and
carrying no top-level element of its own -- which declares a 120-unit loop
from the disc. A reader looking only at ptbtn00 sees a one-shot because the
looping element is the one a declaration-order walk never reaches. Same
element that needed the by-name accessor in ui_layout, for the same reason.
Cross-check that makes it more than a stopwatch reading: 120 declared units
at the rate law is 2.000 s at 60 Hz, against a measured mean of 2.24 s over
four intervals -- 12% long, the direction and roughly the size Canary's
pacing produces.
Stated plainly as what it is not: the port asked for a per-frame series and
this is not one. The four intervals come from the screenshot probe, the
weaker instrument, carrying a wall-clock duration off an emulator with
load-dependent pacing -- the class that has cost this corpus four withdrawn
timing claims. The strong instrument has never reached this screen: five
attempts, blocked by wall-clock timeout, frame cap, a self-matching pkill,
and the title sitting past the 137.7 s attract movie.
So the fact and the period are answerable now; the trajectory within a
cycle is not, and I am not inferring its shape from declared keyframes when
the whole point of the splash exercise was that only a capture confirms
shape.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01Jc4pciRArGHfxGGhEbwp5t
e820121d8a