7
UPDATE: A new enhanced version of this model is avaliable here: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18882696 This paper presents a refined Socio-Economic Thermodynamic (SETE) model to analyse the dynamic relationship between the human political-economy and its biophysical constraints. Conventional economic models, rooted in the Strong Enlightenment tradition — defined as the belief in axiomatic myths of perpetual progress, human-technological omnipotence, and the separability of the economy from biophysical laws — fail to capture material limits, mandating a scientific-method-based re-evaluation. We propose a two-body orbital mechanics framework embedded within thermodynamic laws: The Central Earth-System: Contains the Resource Entropy Singularity (S_crit), the critical thermodynamic collapse point, preceded by the Entropic Event Horizon (H). The Orbiting Political-Economy (PE): Defined by an inertial mass (M) (accumulated material stock M_M and institutional/ideological stock M_I ). The core finding is that growing inertial mass (M) drives path dependency, while ”Entropic Drag” (F_drag) diverts useful Exergy into ”Maintenance Power” (P_maint), creating biophysical inflationary pressures. The Entropic Event Horizon (H) is the point where political and ideological inertia (M_I ) makes the required structural change (vrequired) unattainable, as M_I dictates the maximum politically feasible velocity of change(v_political−feasible). Analysis of the IPCC Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSPs) shows that only structural reductions in inertial mass and a shift toward use-value–driven economic activity—valuing durable, repairable, andfunctional products—provides a thermodynamically viable escape trajectory from collapse by reducing M and the Entropy Generation Coefficient (γ), assuming the H boundary hasn’t already been crossed. This approach is consistent with ecological critiques of political economy (Foster, 2009) while remaining grounded in physical law.


“The need for action is thermodynamic, not ideological: failure to reduce M and γ sufficiently prevents the system from generating the escape velocity (vrequired) required to avoid inertial lock-in at H.”
A winning argument, thank you :) Why these can’t be written in human? You do a huge research and find something but don’t bother to explain it, why research human, why?
To be fair, the paper author’s substack is written in plainer humanese.
I searched for this and it said “Log in for more Or create an account”. Very plain indeed.
Oh, his newer blog posts are subscriber-only. After a week or so they are available for everybody. Not a smart move, but it’s his blog.
I was able to download the pdf file without any registering.