Appendix B. Evidence audit
The publication's source inventory contains 25 files representing 23 distinct papers. Two LSD files are byte-identical; an astronaut article is repeated with a cover. Reviews, preprint/publication versions and likely shared cohorts are not additional independent replications. The publication identifies file hashes and reference metadata in its accompanying research record. The inventory below preserves the reported study identities, overlaps and evidential limits.
Supplied literature: evidential status and consequential limits
| Source | Retained assessment |
|---|---|
| Šorli et al. (2026) | A speculative presentist interpretation. Coordinate notation and null intervals do not establish nonphysical time. |
| Kuypers and Rijavec (2025) | A conditional stationary timer construction, retaining ideal-clock scope and synchronization matching. |
| Riggs (2026) | The central radicand argument fails under its own earlier constraint; equation (15) supplies the algebra. |
| Coull et al. (2011) | Controlled selective timing effects in small analyzed samples. Hazard is not the thermodynamic arrow. |
| Yanakieva et al. (2019) | LSD reproduction effects; the duplicate counts once. No general direct passage/pace measurement is established. |
| Wittmann et al. (2007) | Psilocybin timing, memory and motor components, . No literal years-in-minutes result. |
| Fountas et al. (2020) | The audited duration/memory preprint model. Its later publication is not another experiment. |
| Berkovich-Ohana et al. (2013) | A small instructed meditation study with fixed order. Timelessness does not establish absent succession. |
| Miceli McMillan et al. (2025) | Conceptual distinctions in psychedelic temporality, not a separate intervention. |
| Gruber et al. (2018) | A multidisciplinary review. The proposed claustrum experiment was not performed in that paper. |
| Vogel et al. (2018) | A qualitative treated-depression sample, without an objective interval/order task in that study. |
| Ueda et al. (2018) | A four-study symptom/timing meta-analysis, with heterogeneous targets and overlap with the timing literature. |
| Ciullo et al. (2016) | Explicit-timing meta-analysis. A subgroup null is neither equivalence nor a uniquely identified clock mechanism. |
| Ren et al. (2023) | A depression review overlapping primary studies and earlier syntheses. |
| Jiang et al. (2025) | A perspective article, not new psychedelic experimental data. |
| Ochi and Kawamura (2026) | A supplied mini-review whose external indexing was not independently confirmed in the source investigation. Cases are not group proof. |
| Teghil and Wittmann (2025) | A bodily, insular and motor review. Maps do not establish one complete mechanism. |
| Muller and Nobre (2014) | Distributed timing and calibration. This does not exclude a central mechanism with local readouts. |
| Navarro Morales et al. (2023) | The astronaut body duplicate counts once. Minute production is closer to 60 seconds in flight; means and standard deviations remain distinct. |
| Turyshev et al. (2016) | Clock, coordinate and signal modeling, not a completed orbital test. |
| Cacciapuoti et al. (2024) | Hardware preparation and projected space performance in the inspected version. |
| Garrett-Bakelman et al. (2019) | One twin pair. Molecular and physiological changes differ from direct clock or passage measurements. |
| Cheeseman et al. (2012) | Bee anesthesia and circadian phase, not human lost subjective time. |
The seven targeted additions address different missing functions: Saija et al. (2014), order versus fusion; Sankaran et al. (2024), pitch change and expectation; Riecke et al. (2007), auditory continuity; Zuo et al. (2020), online integration in amnesia; Wacongne et al. (2011), predictive omission responses; Rozenberg et al. (2019), physical circuit primitives; and Lamprou-Kokolaki et al. (2024), matched duration and passage judgments.
Their limitations are correspondingly different. Correlational recordings do not prove necessity. A single case cannot establish universality. A component circuit does not certify an experiencing device. Each constrains part of the proposed organization without independently proving the constitutive premises.
Published source: Experienced Temporal Passage. Read the original PDF alongside the web treatment.