Representational Change Has No Standing Effects

This paper demonstrates that changes in representation have no effect on standing. Altering notation, parametrization, coordinate choice, or descriptive language is shown to leave legitimacy entirely unchanged so long as admissibility constraints are preserved. Apparent gains or losses in explanatory power arising from representational shifts are identified as artifacts of bookkeeping preference rather than structural differences. The argument is strictly eliminative and non-constructive, introducing no new semantics, dynamics, or evaluative mechanisms. By fixing representational neutrality on record, the paper closes a persistent class of interpretive errors in physics, mathematics, and philosophy that mistake descriptive flexibility for ontic or epistemic change.