Admissibility Governed Bookkeeping Regimes

This paper establishes that all viable descriptive frameworks in physics and mathematics function as bookkeeping regimes governed by admissibility, not as ontic mirrors of reality. It shows that representational schemes are licensed only insofar as they preserve standing under admissible redescription, and that any bookkeeping structure exceeding this role constitutes illicit surplus. The analysis is strictly eliminative: it does not propose new formalisms or methods, but exhaustively constrains what bookkeeping regimes may exist, how they may relate, and why no regime can claim foundational privilege. As a result, the paper reframes competing theoretical frameworks as admissibility-bounded accounting systems whose validity is binary and fail-closed, contributing directly to maximal closure by excluding ontology, dynamics, or explanatory force at the level of representation itself.