Denomination friction
₹500 in the drawer cannot automatically fund a ₹10 refund. In real cash operations, denomination composition matters. Our model tracks a spendable small-note float as a subset of cash.
ENCOUNTER 01 / 32PAYMENTS
CONSEQUENCES CARRY FORWARD
An infeasible choice is blocked, not silently turned into a negative balance. Each completed encounter produces auditable entries.
The books must balance.
Each event posts equal debits and credits. Sales recognize revenue and cost of goods separately; credit sales create a receivable, and supplier credit creates a payable. This is an educational general ledger, not a tax or inventory system.
| Day | Account | Debit ₹ | Credit ₹ | Reason |
|---|
The field notebook.
What did you observe, what did you infer, and what does the model actually support? Search decisions or record reflections.
The road not taken.
Replay your own decisions against the alternative on the same starting state. This comparison is local, mechanical and non-causal: it says what this model would have recorded, not what real people would have done.
More than a money drawer.
Revenue is not cash
Credit sales can recognize revenue without collecting cash. Inventory purchases exchange one asset for another; the expense is ordinarily recognized as cost of goods when sold.
Trust is not a thermometer
Our "relationship marks" are a fictional feedback device, not a validated measure or psychological diagnosis. They are deliberately excluded from financial statements.
Who absorbs friction?
Payment uncertainty, expired products, unpaid tabs and labour costs move risk among customers, workers and owners. The most profitable decision may not be the fairest.
Verified research doors
These sources provide context, not empirical calibration of the fictional parameters:
- Ministry of Finance / NPCI: UPI ten-year statistics (April 2026)
- Ministry of Finance: retail digital payments (March 2026)
- ILO: Informal economy research portal
- Reserve Bank of India: payments and financial education
Research direction: compare documented shop-floor observations with an explicitly specified model; never treat a simulated choice as evidence about actual people.