Is there an objective right and wrong?

OPH's ethical proposal treats avoidable suffering, exported costs and the agency of affected observers as constraints on acceptable arrangements. Repair quantities can help make consequences explicit, but a mathematical mismatch does not identify moral wrongness by itself. A model can reduce disagreement by silencing a victim or deleting the record of an injury. Calling that good would require abandoning the very people the ethical account is meant to include. The value premise is that their suffering and capacity to participate matter. Given that premise, acts can be compared by how they repair harm or pass its costs to others. Choosing the relevant observers, horizon and weighting remains part of the ethical specification. Agreement theorems establish properties of a process; the moral interpretation requires these additional commitments.

See also Can physics prove what we ought to do? (The is–ought problem), If everyone agrees on something, does that make it true?, Are we morally responsible for what we do?

Also in Appendix A: Eighteen Questions.