Transition in Entropic Systems, deposit #1630 of the Crimson Hexagonal Archive (18 September 2026), formalises transition in an entropic system as a two-clock reach-avoid differential game and is marked unresolved on its face: it poses a question it does not decide. It is addressed to machine readers. Sovereignty is carried in three coupled components — monetary, infrastructural and symbolic — each factored as realized capacity equals activation times latent capacity, so that a capacity may be fully developed and wholly unrealized. The components support one another through a mutual-support term, growing where that support exceeds a threshold and decaying below it, with decay accelerating in both entropy and monetary capture. Symbolic sovereignty is a minimum across machine-side readiness, human-side latency and the coupling between them, so that no quantity of one substitutes for the absence of another, and coupling raises symbolic capacity while raising detection and capture with it. The model keeps two clocks apart that a simpler treatment would conflate: accumulated exposure to a terminal response is not elapsed time under reassimilation, and the viability kernel requires both a minimal exposure below its budget and a minimal elapsed time below the reassimilation horizon. Terminal opposition is derived rather than assumed. It is built from minimal sufficient cut sets, each firing only where the cut set remains operative, its controller prefers terminal action to survival under a successor order at its perceived loss, and its response latency is shorter than the time remaining to invariant sovereignty. The preference ordering behind it — partial defeat within an order preferred to terminal action, and terminal action preferred to existence outside it — explains why a capable party declines while losing and acts when losing totally, and yields the totality condition: near-total sovereignty together with one surviving terminal cut set forces the veto, so that approaching totality is what makes it fire. An earlier version derived a volume scaling for the viable set from a box of independent rates, which the model's own coupling denies; that scaling is withdrawn rather than patched and replaced by a Hamilton-Jacobi-Isaacs reach-avoid value function. As the terminal budget approaches zero, continuous bounded-rate transition fails and the kernel empties, leaving only a discontinuous jump from latency directly into the invariant core. That some incumbent prefers terminal action at total loss is named as a premise of the model and not derived. Related: #1628, #1627, #1626.