The Universal & Atomic Elements of Organization
A falsifiable scientific theory proposing that the same irreducible structures organize both thought and reality — from the quantum to the social scale.
O-Theory proposes that four irreducible structures — Distinctions, Systems, Relationships and Perspectives (DSRP) — form the universal grammar of organization. Rather than being merely useful ways of thinking, these structures are hypothesized to be the atomic elements from which every organized phenomenon emerges, whether in cognition, biology, physics, mathematics, society, or the cosmos.
| D | S | R | P |
| Distinctions | Systems | Relationships | Perspectives |
| Identity ↔ Other | Part ↔ Whole | Action ↔ Reaction | Point ↔ View |
| D := (i ↔ o) | S := (p ↔ w) | R := (a ↔ r) | P := (ṗ ↔ v) |
This is a living scientific evidence compendium: an open, continually evolving collection of independent empirical research, formal theory, mathematical proofs, cross-disciplinary analyses, applications, critiques, and proposed falsifications. Every entry is included because it supports, refines, challenges, or attempts to falsify the theory.
Scientific theories are strengthened not only by evidence that confirms their predictions, but also by surviving attempts to falsify them. This compendium brings both together: independent evidence from researchers who were not testing DSRP and proposed counterexamples evaluated against the formal theory.
One counterexample is enough to falsify O-Theory. Until then, the question remains: do the same four structures organize everything from quantum systems to human thought?
Independent convergence is one of the strongest forms of scientific evidence because researchers arrive at the same conclusion while investigating different questions for different reasons.
The number is not the point. Researchers in different fields, studying different questions with different methods, repeatedly arrived at the same structural predictions—almost always without testing DSRP or using its language.
Try a different term or clear the filters.
This compendium began as the peer-reviewed literature review “A Literature Review of the Universal and Atomic Elements of Complex Cognition,” published in the Journal of Systems Thinking with 109 studies. That paper is the peer-reviewed foundation. What you see here is its living, continuously updated version . New studies are checked before they are added, and the collection now holds and keeps growing. Open any card to see what the researchers found, why it bears on DSRP, and where the original review discusses it, the fuller account.
The collection is updated continuously, so the citation carries the date you consulted it rather than a study count — the count changes weekly, and putting it in the reference would make the same collection look like a different work to everyone who cites it. To cite a single claim or study, use its own address: every one has a permanent link.
This is the adversarial half of the compendium. Where the evidence track asks what converges on DSRP, this one asks what would end it: a single organized phenomenon whose structure needs a fifth pattern, a ninth element, or a fifth structural dynamic. It holds written up from candidates across territories, and resolutions — the general answers those cases settle against. Every case is published whether it held or failed, including the ones still open.
Cite this rather than the evidence collection when the point is what survived attack. The two are separate works with separate addresses: one asks what converges on the theory, the other asks what would end it, and a reference to the first does not support a claim about the second. Case and resolution numbers change when the record is revised, so cite a case by its own permanent link rather than by number.
This collection is meant to keep growing. Send us a study, paper, book or critique that bears on DSRP, whether it supports the theory or cuts against it, and we will read it and decide whether it belongs.
Authors Roy Maartens, Jessica Santiago, Chris Clarkson, Basheer Kalbouneh, Christian Marinoni
Year 2024
Publisher Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics
Kind of work article
Discipline Cosmology
Secondary disciplines Astronomy, Physics
Applied false
Read it at the publisher 10.1088/1475-7516/2024/09/070
The disagreement between low- and high-redshift measurements of the Hubble parameter is emerging as a serious challenge to the standard model of cosmology. We develop a covariant cosmographic analysis of the Hubble parameter in a general spacetime, which is fully model-independent and can thus be used as part of a robust assessment of the tension. Here our focus is not on the tension but on understanding the relation between the physical expansion rate and its measurement by observers -- which is critical for model-independent measurements and tests. We define the physical Hubble parameter and its multipoles in a general spacetime and derive for the first time the covariant boost transformation of the multipoles measured by a heliocentric observer. The analysis is extended to the covariant deceleration parameter. Current cosmographic measurements of the expansion anisotropy contain discrepancies and disagreements, some of which may arise because the correct transformations for a moving observer are not applied. A heliocentric observer will detect a dipole, generated not only by a Doppler effect, but also by an aberration effect due to shear. In principle, the observer can measure both the intrinsic shear anisotropy and the velocity of the observer relative to the matter -- without any knowledge of peculiar velocities, which are gauge dependent and do not arise in a covariant approach. The practical implementation of these results is investigated in a follow-up paper. We further show that the standard cosmographic relation between the Hubble parameter, the redshift and the luminosity distance (or magnitude) is not invariant under boosts and holds only in the matter frame. A moving observer who applies the standard cosmographic relation should correct the luminosity distance by a redshift factor -- otherwise an incorrect dipole and a spurious octupole are predicted.
To derive, in a fully model-independent covariant framework, how the Hubble parameter and its higher multipoles depend on the motion of the observer measuring them.
Not an empirical sample; a theoretical/mathematical cosmographic derivation applied to interpretation of current expansion-anisotropy measurements.
Covariant general-relativistic derivation of boost transformations for the Hubble parameter and its multipoles between the matter (comoving) frame and a moving (heliocentric) observer's frame, compared to standard cosmographic relations.
A heliocentric (moving) observer necessarily detects a dipole in the Hubble parameter generated by both a Doppler effect and a shear-induced aberration effect, and the standard cosmographic distance-redshift relation is not boost-invariant, so applying it without a frame correction produces a spurious dipole and octupole.
The finding demonstrates the Perspectives pattern because the measured value and multipole structure of the Hubble parameter change depending on the observer's reference frame, and a Relationships component because the paper derives the coupling, via Doppler and shear-induced aberration, linking observer motion to the measured dipole and higher multipoles.
Patterns it shows R, P
Added 2026-09-28
How to cite this Roy Maartens, Jessica Santiago, Chris Clarkson, Basheer Kalbouneh, Christian Marinoni (2024). Covariant cosmography: the observer-dependence of the Hubble parameter. Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics.