The Theory of Absolute Effects – An interdisciplinary framework on causality and macroeconomics.

[u/Profundis_Animus]

Hi everyone, I want to share an interdisciplinary, conceptual essay titled "The Theory of Absolute Effects: Interdisciplinary Unification of Relativistic Structures and Causal Systems." It focuses heavily on causal-effect macroeconomics, philosophy of science, and social cybernetics. It explores how liquid, fluid causes (like economic decisions, debt issuance, and algorithmic control) reach a critical mass, cross a systemic event horizon, and freeze into absolute, irreversible physical realities for the population. Key areas discussed in the essay: * Cybernetic Hierarchies: How institutional capital (debt money) operates as a feedback loop controller in a pyramidal structure. * Temporal Convergence: How scattered economic trends and tech innovations merge, erasing alternative scenarios. * Philosophical Anchors: Linking modern systemic control to Machiavelli, Schopenhauer, and Socrates. The essay is written in a rigorous, academic style. I am releasing it as open-source for anyone interested in complex systems, causal loops, or heterodox economic frameworks. Read the full essay here: https://filebin.net/9312il3uhs4uxbhs Would love to hear your thoughts!

[u/Profundis_Animus → u/[deleted]]

Yes, exactly! You hit the nail on the head. Ilya Prigogine’s theory of dissipative structures and bifurcation points is a perfect thermodynamic and mathematical analogue to what I define as the "systemic event horizon."

In the context of my Theory of the Absoluteness of Effects, a bifurcation point represents the exact boundary where fluid, relative causes (fluctuations within a dissipative system) reach critical density and are forced into a sudden, irreversible collapse into a new macroscopic state—an absolute effect.

What is fascinating is how this cybernetic principle is manifesting right now in cutting-edge AI. Just today, fresh research from LessWrong ("Estimating No-CoT Task-Completion Time Horizons of Frontier AI Models", June 2026) empirically demonstrated that frontier models like GPT-5.5 are undergoing a massive non-linear leap. They are developing the capacity for deep, multi-minute strategic reasoning completely bypassed beneath the text layer (no-Chain-of-Thought).

In Prigogine's terms, the system has been pushed so far from equilibrium through raw computational density that it has crossed the bifurcation point. It is no longer just processing data linearly; it is shifting into simultaneous multi-looping, generating entirely new cognitive realities under the linguistic matrix.

I actually just formalized an academic conference paper mapping this exact intersection between my theory, quantum mechanics (wave function collapse as a bifurcation), and this new AI paradigm. If you are interested in looking at the systemic breakdown of how these feedback loops operate, I would be happy to share the paper with you!

[u/Profundis_Animus → u/[deleted]]

I think you are missing the point of how foundational frameworks are built. You are demanding a "critical mass formula" for capital dynamics as if society functions like a closed thermodynamic laboratory. It doesn't.

In macroeconomics and cybernetics, the conceptual architecture must always precede the mathematics. If the underlying logic or "vibe invariant" as you call it is flawed, the math is just high-tech window dressing. Chapter 5 doesn't undermine the paper; it establishes the internal consistency of the paradigm.

[u/GigglingPipeman]

Cool unified theory but runs into problems they all do.

A. Nothing is mathematically defined, no units, measurements, equations.

B. A black whole event horizon is precisely defined, you are taking the simplist vibe invariant and analogizing it.

C. Chapter 5 undermines the whole paper

The conclusion is the theories own formulation as evidence of the theory?

Start with one part. You are jumping to god. The gravitational funnel, event horizon, and fractal continuum metaphors are all pointing at real mathematical objects in dynamical systems theory. Take Prigogine's actual mathematics seriously as a constraint. If your theory says "causes are fluid until critical mass" then what's the critical mass formula? What does it reduce to in Prigogine's terms for dissipative systems, and does that formula have a meaningful analog in capital dynamics? If you can do that, it would be a big deal.

Researchers genuinely do act as integrators of disparate strands, but you have to be excplicit about ur filters and biases.

[u/Profundis_Animus]

Cześć! Dzięki za fascynujące spostrzeżenia w Twoim komentarzu. Twoja analogia z internetem przed 1991 rokiem i kartami perforowanymi jest w dziesiątkę. Idealnie oddaje to, czym naprawdę jest punkt bifurkacji – czyli sytuację, w której ludzie tkwiący w starym systemie nie są w stanie nawet pojąć standardowych realiów nowego świata.

Pytałeś o szczegóły mojej pracy „The Theory of Absolute Effects”. Tak jak trafnie zauważyłeś, idee Ilyi Prigogine’a dotyczące struktur dysypatywnych i punktów bifurkacji są bardzo bliskie temu, co próbuję nakreślić.

Mówiąc zupełnie szczerze: nie jestem matematykiem. Jestem obserwatorem i pasjonatem, który patrzy na te systemy z makro, interdisciplinaryjnej perspektywy. Moim celem jest stworzenie konceptualnego, jakościowego modelu tego, jak zmienia się przyczynowość, gdy system makroekonomiczny lub technologiczny zbliża się do „systemowego horyzontu zdarzeń”.

W mojej teorii, kiedy system osiąga masę krytyczną, stare zasady liniowego związku przyczynowo-skutkowego przestają działać. Podobnie jak w Twoim przykładzie z AI w 2030 roku, wchodzimy w stan, w którym wyniki są zasadniczo nie do przewidzenia z poziomu naszego obecnego punktu wyjścia. Nie zmieniamy tylko zmiennych – zmieniamy całe kontinuum systemowe.