| I’ve been working on something I call the EMIS Framework v0.5.2(Energy–Matter–Information-Spacetime)— Modeling Economics as a Low-Dimensional Energy System. The core idea: Treat the economy as a constrained 2D energy manifold where money is a bookkeeping layer over energy allocation, and macro structure emerges holographically from boundary-level discrete transactions. Very roughly: L1 — 2D Manifold Hypothesis
Social/economic systems behave like low-dimensional constrained surfaces rather than high-entropy volumetric systems. This reframes growth, inflation, and inequality as curvature problems rather than equilibrium problems. L2 — JT-Gravity Analogy
Introducing a Jackiw–Teitelboim–like action to model macro constraints. Policy acts like boundary condition manipulation rather than “force injection.” L3 — Holographic Mapping
Discrete micro-transactions at the boundary construct macroeconomic structure in the bulk. This attempts to dissolve the 100-year micro vs macro divide. L4 — Random Matrix Regime
In high-complexity phases, the system transitions to random-matrix statistics (crisis, bubbles, phase shifts). Stability becomes a spectral property. I’m currently working on: - Formalizing the action functional (so it’s not just metaphor) - Defining the admissible ensemble boundary for economic RMT - Building a small simulation engine to test curvature vs liquidity stress This is still early and probably wrong in 20 different ways.
But if the geometry holds, it could provide: - A unification layer between econ and complex systems physics - A compression model for macro indicators - A path toward AI-native economic modeling (neuro-symbolic) Would love to hear from: - Theoretical physicists willing to sanity-check the gravity mapping - Quant folks familiar with RMT edge cases - Anyone who thinks this is obviously nonsense Happy to share drafts if there’s interest. |