physics.soc-phJul 21, 2026

Temporal-Causal Unity as an Operational Framework for Collective Dynamics: Causal-Progress Clocks, Synchronization, and Polarization

Authors: Jian LiuDong Sun

Organizations: Xintong Zhima (Beijing) Technology Co., Ltd., Beijing, China

Abstract

This paper develops temporal-causal unity (TCU), a framework connecting a process-philosophical thesis -- time is the ordered unfolding of causal change -- to an operational model of cognitive and social dynamics. The framework deliberately separates three claims: an interpretive thesis about becoming, a measurable causal-progress coordinate, and a stochastic network model. Causal progress is defined by τ(t)=0tλ(sHs)dsτ(t)=\int_0^tλ(s\mid\mathcal H_s)\,{\rm d}s, where the nonnegative event intensity λλ must be specified independently of the outcome. Agents carry an orientation phase and an activation amplitude; weighted interaction, heterogeneous drift, external input, anchoring, and diffusion govern their evolution in ττ. First- and second-harmonic order parameters separate consensus from bipolar polarization. For the all-to-all noisy Kuramoto special case with Lorentzian drift width ΔΔ, synchronization begins at the conditional threshold Kc=2(Δ+D)K_c = 2(Δ+ D), not at a universal constant. Reproducible numerical illustrations illustrate (not empirically demonstrate) this threshold, causal-clock curve collapse, and the consensus-polarization distinction. Six historical episodes are treated as scope probes rather than validation data. The paper derives falsifiable hypotheses and an out-of-sample protocol for comparing causal-progress and chronological-time models. TCU is therefore offered as a disciplined bridge between process ontology and complex-systems modeling, not as a replacement for spacetime physics or as an empirically established identity between time and causation.

Explore similar work

Jul 24, 2026cs.LG

Beyond Directed Acyclic Graphs: Causal Zeros and Causal Differential Equations

Pearl's structural causal model (SCM) framework, built on directed acyclic graphs (DAGs) and the do-calculus, is the dominant formal language for causal reasoning. Yet it carries two structural restrictions: every relationship must be pre-specified as a directed causal edge, and feedback cycles are forbidden. This paper examines two classes of phenomena that strain these restrictions. First, symmetric physical and economic constraints, the ideal gas law being the canonical case, carry no intrinsic causal direction. Direction emerges only under intervention, and which variable is solved for must be specified as part of the intervention. We formalize such constraints as causal zeros within an Extended Causal Model by adding an activation operator, subject to local solvability and graph-admissibility conditions. Second, for the class of finite-propagation state-space systems considered here, we treat apparent instantaneous cycles as artifacts of suppressed time and ground both causal zeros and feedback in Causal Differential Equations (CDEs). In these, the transient regime is a time-unrolled acyclic causal process, and causal zeros arise as the defining functions of attracting equilibrium manifolds; periodic and chaotic attractors define further regimes of the same dynamics, treated through attractor-relative intervention. We give the extended do-calculus, identifiability conditions, counterfactual semantics, and open problems.
Sergei V. Kalinin
Jun 1, 2026cs.MA

A Simple Hierarchical Causality Primer

We provide a brief primer for the idea behind formalising hierarchical causality in the context of complex systems. Here actors are not simply agents. Actors instantiate causation classes. Agents implement local dynamics in given levels or organisation in a given system. Hierarchical causality then describes how actor-level roles constrain, select, and organise agent-level behaviour across levels. The system then necessarily requires three additional structures. First, causation classes to abstract a given form of causal influence that an actor instantiates. Second, aggregation operators to move across the levels. Third, discrete event-time maps are required because the system comprises events, and the relation between local event counts and any global clock must be specified. Our formulation here is purposefully simple and discrete.
Tim Gebbie
Apr 26, 2026cs.AI

Causal Discovery as Dialectical Aggregation: A Quantitative Argumentation Framework

Constraint-based causal discovery is brittle in finite-sample regimes because erroneous conditional-independence (CI) decisions can cascade into substantial structural errors. We propose Quantitative Argumentation for Causal Discovery (QACD), a semantics-driven framework that represents CI outcomes as graded, defeasible arguments rather than irreversible constraints. QACD maps statistical test outcomes to argument strengths and aggregates conflicting evidence through connectivity-mediated witness propagation, producing a fixed-point acceptability labeling over candidate adjacencies. Experiments on standard benchmark Bayesian networks suggest that QACD improves structural coherence and interventional reliability in several noisy or inconsistent CI regimes, while remaining competitive with classical constraint-based, hybrid, and prior argumentation-based baselines.
Sheng Wei, Yulin Chen, Beishui Liao