Ars Inquirendi

AI-generated conjecture · below the evidence/publication boundary

← All conjectures · Money & economy

The 6.6-mile theorem

Status: Anticipated · untested

Status is derived only from the shepherd-authored triage/prediction data above -- community submissions and claims are a separate overlay and can never change it (see the participation panel below).

This is a proposed connection between two domains, generated by a language model. It is not an article and not evidence: it sits below the evidence/publication boundary. A quantitative prediction and a named kill-dataset are attached (when registered) so the claim stays falsifiable rather than merely evocative.

Claim (verbatim)

The 6.6-mile theorem. In the 13th century, English law adopted a rule for how far apart markets must be — the spacing derived in the classic legal reckoning from a day's return journey on foot, about 6.6 miles. The conjecture joins this statute to the theory of self-organizing spatial equilibria: central-place economics predicts that competing markets space themselves at just such intervals without anyone legislating it, because a market too close to a rival cannot draw a living catchment. If that is right, the law codified an equilibrium rather than creating one, and the geography should show it: English market charters granted before the spacing statute should already exhibit the statutory spacing, with pre-statute nearest-neighbor distances statistically indistinguishable from post-statute ones. A jump in spacing at the statute would mean law made the pattern; continuity means law merely ratified it.

Prediction clause (verbatim)

For each chartered market in the geocoded charter series, compute the nearest-neighbor distance to markets already chartered at its foundation date, split into pre-statute and post-statute cohorts, and compare the two spacing distributions. Primary clause: the pre-statute median nearest-neighbor spacing already lies within one mile of the statutory 6.6-mile norm, and the pre- and post-statute distributions show no significant shift at p < 0.05; a clearly tighter pre-statute spacing that jumps to the statutory value only after the law kills the conjecture. The verdict follows the primary clause.

Kill-dataset (verbatim)

charter geodata pre- and post-statute.

Nobody has run this test. The kill-data is named above. If you can run it — or you know the paper that already settles it — claim the kill or submit the prior scholarship. Kills and prior scholarship are credited here, by name, as they come in.

On Inferpedia

This conjecture has been linked to the following subject pages on Inferpedia — an encyclopedia of the missing, now in limited preview.

Provenance

Run: Imported conversation (verbatim harvest) · model: claude-fable-5

Origin: operator conversation with Claude Fable 5 at max effort, conducted 2026-07-03, relayed verbatim by the operator into the shepherd session on 2026-07-04. No ModelRun exists for the original generation (it happened outside the pipeline); this transcript file is the canonical capture. Transcript path: docs/generated/conjecture_harvest_fablemax_20260703.md. Model (operator-attested, not pipeline-recorded): claude-fable-5. Novelty disclaimer (verbatim, load-bearing -- rule 4): "Same caveat as before, doubled: at 100 items across all of archaeology and history, some of these will have cousins in the literature I can't check. What I can guarantee is the format — each links two things not normally linked, and each names the dataset or measurement that would kill it."

Novelty / leakage triage

anticipated in the literature — this exact test has never been run

The dossier partially undermines the conjecture's framing: the 6⅔-mile spacing was already a stated LEGAL norm before any codifying statute — attributed to Bracton and applied in royal charters (Loughborough, 1227) — so pre-statute spacing conformity could reflect early law rather than self-organized equilibrium; the discriminating window is the pre-Bracton charter record. The empirical spacing measurement itself (charter geodata pre/post) was not located as performed, and the Gazetteer of Markets and Fairs provides the enabling GIS dataset.

Predictions

No prediction registered yet.

Weigh in

No community feedback yet.

New here? Create an account first

Create an account or sign in and your feedback is tied to you — you can track it, get replies, and claim this conjecture so others know you’re working on it. Prefer not to? Just leave your take below as a guest — only the name you type is shown.

Add your take

Posted immediately (spam is removed). Community feedback is never an adjudicated verdict and never changes this conjecture's triage label or status above.