And I have shown you for both primes and zooms each an example in regard to front lens element size to aperture diameter and the resulting f-stop, t-stop relationship (and I am not repeating this again).
All these statements were confirmed by the charts you showed.
You've shown me nothing to prove your assertion that the front of a lens diameter will always be equal to or greater than the size of the entrance pupil.
Just because
some or even
many lenses have front elements that are equal to or larger than the entrance pupil does not mean that they
all must be.
All you've shown me is that you deny saying what you've previously said.
You claimed that prime lenses have T-stops closer to the f-number than zoom lenses. I showed that to not be true. There are many prime lenses with T-stops about one-third to one-half stop slower than their f-number, just as there are many zoom lenses with T-stop values about one-third to one-half stops slower than their f-number, just as I showed that there are both primes and zooms with T-stop values very close to their nominal f-number.
You claimed that no prime lenses do magnification between the physical aperture diaphragm and the front of the lens. I showed you that the only way that is possible is if there is no glass or only a flat plate between the aperture diaphragm and the front of the lens. If there is any refractive surface with an index other than 1.00 in front of the aperture diaphragm, then there is either positive or negative magnification occuring.
You claimed that as the magnification between the aperture diaphragm and the front of the lens increases, the difference between the f-number and T-stop must increase. I showed that there are many zoom lenses which maintain the same T-stop throughout their zoom range.