Lux Ferox Research Collective — A Holographic-Thermodynamic Ontology of Information: From Planck-Scale Substrates to Civilizational Cognitive Warfare

Lux Ferox Research Collective — A Holographic-Thermodynamic Ontology of Information: From Planck-Scale Substrates to Civilizational Cognitive Warfare

(Working Paper Series, v11 — March 2026)

DESCRIPTION

Lux Ferox is an independent research initiative applying synthetic peer-review methodology — human epistemic direction combined with adversarial multi-LLM collaboration (DeepSeek, Kimi, Claude) — to develop a unified theoretical framework spanning five interdependent layers: quantum gravity substrates, thermodynamic information processing, neuromorphic hardware architecture, reflexive information ecosystems, and live empirical intelligence.

Methodological premise: Scientific validity can emerge from recursive adversarial critique between AI systems under consistent human direction, explicit epistemic status labeling (MEASURED / ESTIMATED / EXTRAPOLATED / STRUCTURAL / SPECULATIVE), and RFC-style open specification. AI systems function here as epistemic instruments and adversarial validators, not as co-authors in the humanistic sense.

Theoretical Architecture

Authorship & Posture

Human direction: François Mathieu (Lux Ferox Independent Research) — artisan practitioner (blacksmithing, saddlery, precious metals, heritage mediation), independent researcher in AI epistemology. The observer-practitioner posture — empirically grounded, institutionally unconstrained — is treated not as a limitation but as a methodological asset: on a genuinely emergent phenomenon, canonical expertise does not yet exist. Pattern detection, transdisciplinary grounding, and epistemic rigour are the operative criteria.

Infrastructure: Chromebook. Google Colab free tier + API credits. Zenodo + GitHub. Zero institutional funding.

Open Questions

1. Cybernetic source ethics — When LLMs contribute substantively to research, do source-protection conventions apply? Is algorithmic contribution a method, a source, or an emerging ontological category?
2. Cross-layer falsifiability — Can the thermodynamic-cognitive bridge (L0→L3) be tested empirically, or does it remain a productive structural metaphor?
3. Hardware feasibility — Can the quadrivial neuromorphic architecture achieve the projected 10× energy efficiency over GPU baselines at TRL 6–7?
4. Sovereignty paradox — Does European cognitive sovereignty require full decoupling from US cloud infrastructure, and is this politically viable within current NATO alignment?