[noncentral]

Hallucination, drift, and long-horizon reasoning failures are usually treated as engineering bugs — issues that can be fixed with more scale, better RLHF, or new architectures.

RCC (Recursive Collapse Constraints) takes a different position:

These failure modes may be structurally unavoidable for any embedded inference system that cannot access: 1. its full internal state, 2. the manifold containing it, 3. a global reference frame of its own operation.

If those three conditions hold, then hallucination, inference drift, and 8–12-step planning collapse are not errors — they are geometric consequences of incomplete visibility.

RCC is not a model or an alignment method. It is a boundary theory describing the outer limit of what any inference system can do under partial observability.

If this framing is wrong, the disagreement should identify which axiom fails.

Full explanation here: https://www.effacermonexistence.com/rcc-hn-1