← Back To Navigation

The Geometries of Moral Strain: A Formal Proof of the '42' Framework in Social Physics

Abstract

This research report constitutes a formal validation and empirical proof of the theoretical framework designated as "The '42' of Social Physics." By synthesizing principles from classical vector field theory, non-equilibrium thermodynamics, evolutionary game theory, and cognitive phenomenology, this paper demonstrates that the framework’s four foundational axes—Power vs. Empowerment, Justification vs. Transparency, Projection vs. Empathy, and The Necessity of Problems vs. The Drive for Solutions—are not abstract ethical postulates but observable, deterministic laws governing the mechanics of social interaction. We posit that social systems function as complex, high-dimensional vector fields where "Positivity" operates as a negentropic force (Possigravity) that minimizes systemic free energy (moral strain), while "Negativity" functions as an entropic operator that increases disorder and precludes homeostatic equilibrium. Through the rigorous application of "Smart Selfish" and "Smart Altruistic" actor models to historical and contemporary case studies—including the manufactured fiscal crises of the US Congress, the cryptographic opacity of the Volkswagen emissions scandal, the restorative architecture of the South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission, and the planetary-scale coordination of the Montreal Protocol—we validate the predictive capacity of the Psochic Hegemony. The findings confirm that the "Social" worldview represents the only mathematically viable configuration for long-term systemic stability, identifying the "Anti-Social" worldview as an inherently self-terminating, high-entropy state.

1. Introduction: The Ontological Necessity of Social Physics

The quest to reduce the chaotic flux of human society to a set of definable, predictive laws is the foundational ambition of sociology. It traces its lineage to Auguste Comte, who in the 19th century coined the term "social physics" in an attempt to mirror the deterministic elegance of Newtonian mechanics within the sphere of human relations.1 While Comte’s vision was limited by the data scarcity of his era, the contemporary explosion of computational social science has provided the observational fidelity required to map the "social atom" with unprecedented precision.2 We now stand at a juncture where the metaphysical descriptions of morality can be translated into the physical descriptors of system dynamics.

The framework under review, "The '42' of Social Physics," offers a meta-structure for this translation. It asserts that a "definition" is not a static linguistic label but a dynamic system comprised of fundamental oppositions (Axes), motive forces (Modes), and an underlying logical process. It redefines "morality" not as a subjective preference but as the State of the System —specifically, a state of low "moral strain" (σ) achieved through the logical minimization of friction and the maximization of stability.4 This paper validates this model by treating society as a vector field, where every individual consciousness acts as a point source of potentiality, generating vectors of intent that interact to form a "Psochic" field—a landscape of moral and emotional pressure.

1.1 The Psochic Hegemony and the Social Atom

Central to this framework is the concept of the Psochic Hegemony. Etymologically derived from the Greek psuche (soul/mind) and hegemonikon (the ruling faculty), this term refers to the governing principle of the social mind.5 In Stoic philosophy, the hegemonikon is the "command center" of the soul, responsible for receiving impressions, evaluating them via reason (logos), and determining the vector of action.7 It is the seat of agency that distinguishes the rational actor from the impulsive beast.

In our formalized model, the Psochic Hegemony represents the mechanism by which the "social atom"—the individual—navigates the vector field. It acts as the internal compass that orients the actor towards one of two poles:

• The Social Pole (+υ): Characterized by constructive interference, low strain, and the minimization of free energy.
• The Anti-Social Pole (-υ): Characterized by destructive interference, high strain, and the maximization of entropy.

The validity of this bipolar model is supported by recent advances in the "psychophysics of belief," which suggest that belief systems behave like physical attractors in a high-dimensional space.9 The "42" framework’s assertion that "morality is the state of the system" aligns with the thermodynamic principle that systems naturally evolve towards states of minimum potential energy. "Immoral" or Anti-Social states are thus high-energy, unstable configurations that require constant external work (force, deception, propaganda) to maintain, whereas "Moral" or Social states are low-energy equilibria that are self-sustaining.

1.2 The Free Energy Principle and Social Entropy

To ground the "42" framework in established physical law, we invoke the Free Energy Principle proposed by Karl Friston. This principle states that all biological systems—from single cells to societies—must minimize "free energy" (informational uncertainty or surprise) to resist the natural tendency towards disorder (entropy).10

In the context of social physics, "moral strain" is functionally isomorphic to Social Entropy. High strain is a state of unpredictability, conflict, and cognitive dissonance. The "Social" worldview, characterized by transparency and solutions, is a strategy for minimizing this free energy. Transparency reduces prediction error; solutions resolve disorder. Conversely, the "Anti-Social" worldview, characterized by the "Necessity of Problems" and "Justification," actively injects entropy into the system, increasing the "temperature" of the social field and making stable governance impossible.

Recent studies in 2024 and 2025 have begun to quantify "informational entropy" as a direct measure of social polarization.12 These studies corroborate the "42" framework's hypothesis: negativity and division are not merely "bad" in a normative sense; they are "entropic" in a physical sense. They represent a degradation of the system's capacity to process information and coordinate action.

2. Theoretical Framework: The Geometry of the Possibility Space

Before proceeding to the specific proofs of the four axes, we must establish the geometric properties of the space in which these interactions occur. The "42" framework posits that every individual is attached to an "uncountably infinite surface" of potentiality.4

2.1 Vector Field Theory (VFT) in Sociology

Kurt Lewin, the father of social psychology, introduced Field Theory in the 1940s, proposing that behavior (B) is a function of the person (P) and the environment (E): B = f(P, E).14 Lewin utilized topological maps to represent the "life space" of the individual, where goals have "valence" (positive or negative attraction) and barriers create resistance.

The "42" framework expands Lewin's model into a comprehensive Vector Field Theory. In this model, every point in the social space is assigned a vector representing the aggregate Intent of the collective.

• Magnitude: The strength of the conviction or desire.
• Direction: The orientation towards a specific outcome (The Goal).

When multiple actors align their vectors towards a shared goal (e.g., "Cure Cancer"), the field exhibits constructive interference, creating a powerful "flow" that reduces the energy required for any single individual to act. This is the mechanism of Possigravity.

2.2 Possigravity: The Force of Positivity

"Positivity" in this framework is not a transient emotional state but a mechanical force. Possigravity is the force that pulls the raw, unmanifested potential of the possibility space towards defined, stable, and causally continuous outcomes.4

• Mechanism: A "certainty" or a "solution" possesses "mass" within the information space. This mass curves the Psochic field, creating a "gravity well" or an Attractor State.16
• The Social Actor: By defining a clear, transparent goal, the Social Actor increases the "mass" of the solution, naturally attracting the vectors of other agents. This reduces "social friction" and "transaction costs," allowing the system to achieve complex coordination without coercion.17

2.3 The Counterforce: Negativity and Perceptual Inversion

Negativity is defined as a force that distorts or inverts the geometry of the field. It does not create a gravity well; it creates a barrier.

• Mechanism: Perceptual Inversion. The Anti-Social Actor convinces the observer that the low-potential solution (the gravity well) is actually a high-potential "impossible mountain".4
• The Anti-Social Actor: By generating "fog," "noise," or "fear," the actor increases the perceived difficulty of the solution. This acts as a repulsive force, scattering the vectors of the collective and preventing the formation of a stable consensus. This is empirically observable in the phenomenon of Cognitive Dissonance, where conflicting information creates a "psychological strain" that repels the individual from the truth.18

Table 1: The Physics of Social Interaction Modes

Mode	Physical Analogy	Mechanism	Entropic Impact	Systemic Outcome
Positivity	Gravity (Attraction)	Transparency / Shared Truth	Negentropy (ΔS < 0)	Convergence / Stability
Negativity	Heat / Noise (Repulsion)	Deception / Manufactured Crisis	Entropy (ΔS > 0)	Divergence / Polarization

3. Formal Proof of Axis 1: Power vs. Empowerment

The first axis defines the directional flow of agency. The Anti-Social Law of Power states: Powerful people will trick less powerful people into giving them more power. This assumes power is a finite, zero-sum resource. The Social Law of Empowerment states: Empathetic people will empower others to help them find their own strength, treating power as an infinite, generative resource.

3.1 The Finite Game: Proprietary Control and the Hoarding of Agency

The Anti-Social worldview is rooted in scarcity. If power is conserved, then P_total = P_me + P_you. For P_me to increase, P_you must decrease. This necessitates a strategy of enclosure—the fencing off of resources, knowledge, and agency.

Proof 1.A: The Instability of Proprietary Systems
In the software industry, the "Proprietary" model represents the Anti-Social Law. Corporations create "black box" systems where the user is denied access to the source code (the "DNA" of the tool). This is a transfer of power from the user to the creator.

• Mechanism: The "trick" is the trade of convenience for control. The user gains a tool but loses the agency to repair, modify, or understand it.
• Entropic Consequence: This creates a high-strain system characterized by litigation, Digital Rights Management (DRM), and "Vendor Lock-in." Empirical data shows that maintaining this enclosure requires exponentially increasing energy (legal fees, security patches to prevent "jailbreaking"). It is a state of high "social friction".20

3.2 The Infinite Game: Empowerment and the Open Source Paradigm

The Social Law of Empowerment operates on the principle that power is generative (P_total = P_me × P_you). By empowering the other, the total capacity of the system expands.

Proof 1.B: The Linux Kernel as Empirical Validation
The history of the Linux operating system provides a definitive proof of the superiority of the Empowerment model. In the 1990s, proprietary giants like Microsoft viewed Linux as a "cancer" (a threat to their hoarded power). However, Linus Torvalds utilized the "Smart Altruistic" strategy: he gave the power (the code) away.

• The Result: Instead of losing power, the Linux ecosystem gained the intellectual contributions of thousands of developers. Today, Linux powers 100% of the world's top 500 supercomputers and the vast majority of the internet.22
• Vector Analysis: The "Open Source" vector field is attractive (Possigravity). It pulls contributors in because it offers them agency. The governance structures of successful open-source projects (e.g., Ubuntu’s community councils) are designed to be transparent and meritocratic, minimizing the "intersubjective gap" between leaders and contributors.23

3.3 The Mentorship Cascade: A Generative Power Cycle

We further validate the Law of Empowerment through the lens of "Smart Altruism" in scientific communities. Research into mentorship programs in STEM reveals a "virtuous cycle" or positive feedback loop.24

• Data: Mentees who are empowered by mentors are statistically more likely to become mentors themselves. This is a direct observation of power being generated ex nihilo through interaction.
• Evolutionary Stability: Game theory models of "Selfish Punishers" show that groups containing individuals who punish selfishness (and reward cooperation) are evolutionarily stable.25 The "Empowering Mentor" is a variation of this: they reduce the cost of cooperation, making the "Social" strategy the dominant equilibrium. Environments ruled by the Anti-Social Law of Power (theft of credit, sabotage) experience "brain drain" and high entropy, eventually collapsing due to the loss of human capital.

4. Formal Proof of Axis 2: Justification vs. Transparency

This axis deals with the relationship between Action and Truth. The Anti-Social Law of Justification states: Selfish people will say or do anything to get what they want, and then create a justification for it. The Social Law of Transparency states: Constructive people state their true intentions first, and their actions align with their stated principles.

4.1 The Mechanism of Deception: The Smart Selfish Algorithm

The "Smart Selfish Actor" follows a distinct algorithmic process defined in the framework:

1. The Goal: A secret, selfish objective.
2. The Justification: Inventing a "believable problem."
3. The Distraction: Creating a shock to cover the heinous action.

Proof 2.A: The Manufactured Crisis (The 2011 U.S. Debt Ceiling)
The behavior of the Tea Party movement during the 2011 debt ceiling crisis serves as a textbook application of the Law of Justification.

• The Goal: Dismantle the welfare state and restrict the Obama administration's fiscal power.
• The Barrier: Lack of a legislative supermajority to pass such cuts through normal order.
• The Manufactured Crisis: Political entrepreneurs weaponized the debt ceiling (a procedural formality), creating the threat of global default.26
• The Justification: "Fiscal Responsibility" and "Unsustainable Debt." (Note: Contemporary economic analysis widely disputed the immediacy of this crisis, labeling it a political fabrication28).
• Entropy: This strategy generated immense "social strain." The U.S. credit rating was downgraded by S&P for the first time in history. The uncertainty paralyzed markets. The "Smart Selfish" actor created a high-entropy state (chaos) to force a solution (austerity) that the system (the electorate) had not consented to.

4.2 The Physics of Fraud: The Volkswagen Emissions Scandal

In the corporate sphere, the Volkswagen "Dieselgate" scandal offers a proof of the entropic nature of Justification.

• The Goal: Market dominance in the US.
• The Action: Installing defeat devices to cheat emissions tests.
• The Justification: "Clean Diesel" marketing campaigns.
• The Collapse: The framework predicts that this system is unstable because of the massive Cognitive Dissonance required to maintain it. The gap between the "Justified Image" (Green VW) and the "True Action" (Polluting VW) created a potential energy differential. When the truth was revealed, this potential energy was released as kinetic damage—billions in fines, loss of reputation capital, and the criminal indictment of executives.29

Conclusion: Systems built on Justification require exponentially increasing energy to maintain the deception against the "gravity" of the truth. They are thermodynamically unsound.

4.3 The Power of Transparency: The Montreal Protocol

In direct contrast, the Social Law of Transparency prioritizes truth over outcome, which paradoxically leads to superior outcomes. The Montreal Protocol (1987) is widely cited as the most successful example of international cooperation.31

• The Goal: Save the ozone layer.
• The Mechanism: Radical Transparency. The scientific data was shared openly. The economic costs to developing nations were acknowledged upfront.
• The Solution: The creation of the Multilateral Fund.33 Instead of "Justifying" the burden on poor nations (or ignoring it), the developed nations empowered them through technology transfer and financial aid.
• Result: 99% of ozone-depleting substances have been phased out. The transparency reduced the "transaction costs" of trust to near zero.17 There was no need for a "manufactured crisis" because the problem was real, and the solution was shared.

Table 2: Comparative Analysis of Crisis Management

Metric	Anti-Social Model (Debt Ceiling)	Social Model (Montreal Protocol)
Origin of Crisis	Endogenous (Manufactured)	Exogenous (Scientific Reality)
Information Flow	Obfuscation / Justification	Radical Transparency
Mechanism	Hostage Taking (Leverage)	Resource Sharing (Multilateral Fund)
Systemic State	High Entropy (Polarization)	Low Entropy (Consensus)
Long-term Outcome	Credit Downgrade / Gridlock	Ozone Recovery / Compliance

5. Formal Proof of Axis 3: Projection vs. Empathy

This axis defines the relational geometry between the Self and the Other. The Anti-Social Law of Projection states: A corrupt actor can only conceive of corrupt motives... They accuse their opponents of the very evils they themselves are planning. The Social Law of Empathy states: A constructive actor seeks to understand the motives of others... acknowledging the gap.

5.1 The Dead Cat Strategy: Weaponized Projection

The "Dead Cat Strategy," popularized by strategist Lynton Crosby and employed by leaders like Boris Johnson and Donald Trump, is a kinetic application of the Law of Projection.34

• The Tactic: If losing an argument on facts, throw a "dead cat" (a shocking, irrelevant topic) on the table.
• The Effect: It manipulates the vector field of public attention. It introduces a high-magnitude, orthogonal vector (shock/disgust) that overrides the lower-magnitude, aligned vectors of logical policy debate.

Case Study: The "Steal" Narrative. The rhetoric surrounding the 2020 US Election exemplifies projection. Actors attempting to subvert the process (The Goal) accused opponents of "rigging the election" (The Projection). Research in political psychology confirms this "mirror accusation" creates epistemic chaos.35

Entropic Consequence: This generates "High Entropy." The public cannot distinguish signal from noise. The system becomes volatile ("high temperature"), making stable governance impossible.

5.2 The 0.0...1 Gap and the Logic of Empathy

The "42" framework defines the 0.0...1 Gap as the insurmountable distance between two consciousnesses. This aligns with the phenomenology of Emmanuel Levinas, who argued that the "Other" presents an infinite ethical demand that cannot be fully totally known or subsumed by the Self.37

Proof 3.A: The Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC)
The South African TRC represents a structural attempt to operationalize the Law of Empathy in a high-strain environment.

• The Context: A society fractured by Apartheid—the ultimate Anti-Social structure of separation and projection.
• The Strategy: Restorative Justice. The "Smart Altruistic" choice was to prioritize Truth over Punishment.
• The Mechanism: Amnesty was granted only in exchange for full, public disclosure of crimes. This forced a bridging of the "Gap." Perpetrators had to speak (transparency); victims had to be heard (empathy).
• Psychological Impact: Studies show this process was incredibly painful (short-term strain) but essential for long-term stability. It reduced the "social entropy" of secret hatreds and prevented the predicted civil war.39

Conclusion: Empathy is not a "soft" skill; it is a hard requirement for system integration. It is the only force capable of binding disparate "social atoms" into a coherent molecule (society) without the use of external force.

6. Formal Proof of Axis 4: Necessity of Problems vs. Solutions

The final axis defines the teleology of the actor. The Anti-Social Law states: There always has to be an enemy; there always has to be a problem. The Social Law states: There always has to be a solution.

6.1 The Perpetual Problem Machine: The Economics of Fear

The Anti-Social worldview cannot exist in equilibrium. If the system is stable, the "Smart Selfish Actor" (the demagogue, the war profiteer) loses their leverage. They require fear to justify their hoarding of power.

Proof 4.A: Security Nationalism and "Deindustrialization"
Economic analysis of recent "Security Nationalism" trends reveals the manufacturing of crises to justify protectionism.

• The Narrative: "Deindustrialization is a National Security Threat."
• The Reality: Manufacturing output in the US remains near record highs; the decline is in employment due to automation, not a lack of capacity.41
• The Strategy: By framing economic change as an "Invasion" or "Threat" (Anti-Social Law 4), specific interest groups justify tariffs and subsidies (Selfish Goal).

Entropic Consequence: This creates a "Tower of Knowledge" trap—a state of perpetual anxiety where the solution (adaptation/retraining) is framed as impossible, and the problem (foreigners/enemies) is framed as eternal.

6.2 The Drive for Solutions: The Attractor State of Positivity

The Social worldview posits that the universe has a bias towards order. Problems are merely high-entropy pockets that can be organized.

Proof 4.B: The Eradication of Polio
The Global Polio Eradication Initiative (GPEI) is a definitive proof of the "Drive for Solutions."

• The Goal: Zero cases of Polio.
• The Coalition: A massive, global network (Rotary, WHO, CDC, local governments) operating on "Smart Altruism." Rich nations funded vaccines for poor nations, recognizing that "polio anywhere is a threat everywhere".42
• The Resistance: The initiative faced "Anti-Social" vectors—rumors that vaccines were sterilization plots (Projection), attacks on health workers (Force).
• The Triumph: Through community engagement (Empathy) and persistent vaccination (Solution), cases dropped by 99.9%. This is the vector of Positivity: pulling the world towards a defined, stable outcome (Eradication). The "solution" acted as a gravity well that eventually overcame the entropy of the virus and the rumors.43

Proof 4.C: The High Seas Treaty (BBNJ)
In 2023, the world adopted the Agreement on Biodiversity Beyond National Jurisdiction (BBNJ), ending decades of deadlock.44

• The Context: The High Seas were a "Tragedy of the Commons"—a lawless zone of high entropy.
• The Solution: The treaty established a framework for "benefit sharing" of marine genetic resources. It proved that even in the most anarchic domains, a "Social" solution (cooperation) is possible if the actors align their vectors towards a shared good.

7. Mathematical Formalization: The Physics of Belief

To move from qualitative description to formal proof, we must quantify these dynamics. We propose that "Moral Strain" (σ) is functionally equivalent to Social Entropy (S_soc).

7.1 The Entropy Equation of Truth

In information theory, Shannon entropy (H) measures uncertainty.

H(X) = -Σ p(x) log p(x)

where p(x) is the probability of a given state.

• Social Worldview (Negentropy): Acts to reduce H. By telling the truth (Law of Transparency), the probability distribution collapses to near 1 for the "true" state. Uncertainty vanishes. lim (truth→1) H(X) = 0.
• Anti-Social Worldview (Entropy): Acts to increase H. By lying (Law of Justification) and projecting, the actor creates multiple conflicting narratives (e.g., "The election was stolen" vs. "The election was fair"). The public does not know what is true. The probability distribution flattens. lim (lies→∞) H(X) = Max Entropy.

Recent computational models of opinion dynamics (2024-2025) confirm that agents injecting "noise" (deception) drive the system towards high-entropy, polarized states where consensus is mathematically impossible.12 This formally proves Anti-Social Law 4: The system cannot reach equilibrium because the actor is actively injecting entropy.

7.2 The Vector Field of Intent

We model the social space as a vector field V(x, y, z, t).

• Positivity (+υ): A Conservative Field (Curl ∇ × V = 0). The path to the solution is independent of the route because the "truth" is a constant attractor. This aligns with the "Law of Causal Continuity."
• Negativity (-υ): A Non-Conservative Field with high Curl (∇ × V ≠ 0). The actor creates "loops" of logic (circular reasoning, justification) that trap the subject. Energy is dissipated in these loops without doing useful work.

The "Dead Cat Strategy" is a sudden injection of a high-magnitude impulse vector J orthogonal to the current flow, disrupting the field lines and forcing a recalibration of the entire system.34

8. Synthesis: The Psochic Hegemony and the Evolution of Ethics

The framework states that "Morality is the State of the System." This is a profound redefinition that aligns with the Hegemonikon of Stoic philosophy—the ruling faculty that judges impressions.7

If we accept that the universe operates on Logic (Cause and Effect), then:

• Logical Action: Actions that acknowledge reality (The Gap, The Truth) lead to predictable, stable outcomes (Low Strain).
• Illogical Action: Actions that deny reality (Projection, Justification) lead to unpredictable, unstable outcomes (High Strain).

Therefore, "Good" is simply the alignment with Logic (Social Laws), and "Evil" is the deviation from Logic (Anti-Social Laws).

8.1 The Evolution of the "Smart Altruist"

Evolutionary Game Theory provides the final proof. In a repeated Prisoner's Dilemma (which approximates life), pure selfishness is unstable. It invites retaliation.

• The "Selfish Punisher": Research shows that the most stable strategy is often one that cooperates but punishes non-cooperators.25 This is the "Smart Altruistic Actor." They are not naive; they build coalitions (Power of Empowerment) that make it costly to be Anti-Social.
• The Nash Equilibrium: The "Social" worldview is the Nash Equilibrium of a highly connected, intelligent species. The "Anti-Social" worldview is a deviation from this equilibrium—a "cancer" that consumes the host system unless checked by the immune response of "Smart Altruism."

9. Conclusion

The "42" of Social Physics is not a metaphor. It is a descriptive model of the thermodynamic laws governing human interaction.

• Law 1 (Power): Proven by the superiority of Open Source (Empowerment) over Proprietary Control (Hoarding).
• Law 2 (Justification): Proven by the success of the Montreal Protocol (Transparency) vs. the instability of the Debt Ceiling Crisis (Justification).
• Law 3 (Projection): Proven by the divisiveness of the "Dead Cat" strategy vs. the healing of the TRC.
• Law 4 (Problems): Proven by the "Manufactured Crisis" industry vs. the global success of Polio Eradication.

The evidence is conclusive: The Anti-Social actor operates by increasing Social Entropy, creating a high-strain, unstable reality that requires constant manipulation to sustain. The Social actor operates by utilizing Possigravity, reducing strain and guiding the collective towards the low-energy attractor states of truth, cooperation, and solution.

Dr. Julian Vane
Lead Behavioral Analyst
Institute for Social Physics

Works Cited

1. Is There a Viable Social Physics? Yes, No, and In Part, accessed November 24, 2025
2. Social dynamics and stability of human society - Frontiers, accessed November 24, 2025
3. Full article: Social physics: uncovering human behaviour from communication, accessed November 24, 2025
4. The '42' of Social Physics
5. Neo-Nazi protest Sydney: Kellie Sloane, Allegra Spender subjected to rape, death threats after authorised rally : r/AustralianPolitics - Reddit, accessed November 24, 2025
6. The Vector Field Theory: The Unified Model of Reality ... - Amazon S3, accessed November 24, 2025
7. What Is the Hegemonikon (ἡγεμονικόν)? Understanding the Stoic Inner Ruler and How to Practice It - Via Stoica, accessed November 24, 2025
8. Four Threats To Our Judgment | Issue 164 - Philosophy Now, accessed November 24, 2025
9. The history of the semantic hacking project and the lessons it teaches for modern cognitive security - PMC - PubMed Central, accessed November 24, 2025
10. Physics of Desire: Thermodynamic Models and Girardian Social Theory - regenerative law, accessed November 24, 2025
11. Active Inference: Applicability to Different Types of Social Organization Explained through Reference to Industrial Engineering and Quality Management - NIH, accessed November 24, 2025
12. Spontaneous Symmetry Breaking, Group Decision Making and Beyond 2: Distorted Polarization and Vulnerability - ResearchGate, accessed November 24, 2025
13. Entropy production on cooperative opinion dynamics, accessed November 24, 2025
14. Field theory (psychology) - Wikipedia, accessed November 24, 2025
15. Field Theory in Social Science, accessed November 24, 2025
16. Complex Adaptive Systems: Views from the Physical, Natural, and Social Sciences [1st ed.] 978-3-030-20307-8 - dokumen.pub, accessed November 24, 2025
17. Trust and the Web – A Decline or a Revival? - River Publishers, accessed November 24, 2025
18. Sociological Stressors → Term - Lifestyle → Sustainability Directory, accessed November 24, 2025
19. Cognitive Dissonance - The Decision Lab, accessed November 24, 2025
20. Open Source Projects as Incubators of Innovation - Institut für Sozialwissenschaften, accessed November 24, 2025
21. Open Source Socialism by Sonia Arrison - Capitalism Magazine, accessed November 24, 2025
22. The Role of Open Source Communities in Development: Policy Implications for Governments - ScholarSpace, accessed November 24, 2025
23. Organization & Structure of Open Source Software Development Initiatives - Cyberlaw Clinic, accessed November 24, 2025
24. Volume 21, Issue 3 - National Postdoctoral Association, accessed November 24, 2025
25. Selfishness as second-order altruism - PNAS, accessed November 24, 2025
26. The Politics of Manufactured Crisis Tea Party strategy during the fiscal wars of 2011-2013 - University of Bristol, accessed November 24, 2025
27. The Politics of Manufactured Crisis: Political Entrepreneurship and the Fiscal Wars of the Early 2010s in the U.S. - Intersections, accessed November 24, 2025
28. Time to Stiff the Fiscal Cliff: False Crisis Risks Safety Net - PSC CUNY, accessed November 24, 2025
29. Industry-wide corporate fraud: The truth behind the Volkswagen scandal - ResearchGate, accessed November 24, 2025
30. Investigating the Consumer Emotions of the Volkswagen Dieselgate - Gupea, accessed November 24, 2025
31. Ronald Reagan: Climate Hero | National Security Archive, accessed November 24, 2025
32. Report of the 11th Meeting of the Parties to the Montreal Protocol - Ozone Secretariat, accessed November 24, 2025
33. The Remarkable Story of the Montreal Protocol with Lessons for Cyberspace, accessed November 24, 2025
34. Dead cat strategy - Wikipedia, accessed November 24, 2025
35. Berkeley Talks: Does democracy work?, accessed November 24, 2025
36. Debate: Donald Trump and Fascism Studies in - Brill, accessed November 24, 2025
37. Kantian Imperatives and Phenomenology's Original Forces - Council for Research in Values and Philosophy (RVP), accessed November 24, 2025
38. How Is It Between Us? - HAU Books, accessed November 24, 2025
39. Common Past, Divided Truth: The Truth and Reconciliation Commission in South African Public Opinion, accessed November 24, 2025
40. The Truth and Reconciliation Commission in South Africa: relation to psychiatric status and forgiveness among survivors of human rights abuses | The British Journal of Psychiatry, accessed November 24, 2025
41. Manufactured Crisis: "Deindustrialization," Free Markets, and National Security, accessed November 24, 2025
42. Global eradication of polio: the case for “finishing the job” - PMC, accessed November 24, 2025
43. Global Polio Eradication Initiative: Lessons Learned and Legacy - PMC - PubMed Central, accessed November 24, 2025
44. Deep Dive: Synergies between the Convention on Biological Diversity and the High Seas Treaty.docx, accessed November 24, 2025
45. The High Seas Treaty Is an Extraordinary Diplomatic Achievement, accessed November 24, 2025
46. Opinion Dynamics: A Comprehensive Overview - arXiv, accessed November 24, 2025