From Societies to Universality: Reverse Engineering the Layers of Existence

View Online and Translate

“To imagine that our economies and social systems escape universal law is to repeat the error of placing ourselves at the center of the universe.”

The most common elements in the universe, excluding noble gases, are also the most common in our bodies, and this is not a metaphor but a physical fact. With the exception of most hydrogen, which traces back to the Big Bang, nearly every atom that composes us was forged inside stars, dispersed at their deaths, and later gathered into planets, forming chemistry, life, and eventually thought. When the universe’s elements are considered not only by abundance but also by their capacity to form chemical bonds, the alignment becomes clearer, because the elements most capable of interaction are precisely those that life uses most extensively. Carbon, oxygen, nitrogen, and hydrogen are not rare ingredients selected by chance but the most available and versatile building blocks the cosmos provides. Life did not invent a new chemistry; it extended the one already present in the universe, inheriting the same constraints and tensions that govern matter itself.

Having accepted this continuity at the level of matter, we often suspend it at the level of society. The same atoms that obey universal laws when they bind into molecules are assumed, once organized into cultures, economies, and institutions, to operate under different principles. Markets, norms, and collective purpose are frequently treated as products of imagination alone, detached from physics and biology, even though they arise from physical beings interacting under constraints and in ordered configurations that, though invisible, are no less real. If the universe is materially within us, there is no coherent reason to assume that the principles governing how matter organizes cease to apply when that matter produces coordination, meaning, and prosperity.

This question did not emerge from theory but from experience. It arose in places where prosperity failed to consolidate despite effort, discipline, and skill. I encountered it while working with farmers in developing economies whose labor was constant and whose knowledge of their land was deep, yet whose economic reality remained constrained. Appeals to geography, history, culture, or capital did not fully explain why communities facing comparable conditions diverged so consistently over time. The divergence pointed toward configuration rather than accident, toward structure rather than circumstance.

Gradually it became clear that prosperity is not primarily a reward for effort but an emergent consequence of alignment, because communities advance when their members organize around shared direction, when roles are structured to be interdependent rather than isolated, and when trust reduces friction and enables coordination to expand across time. Where these conditions weaken, growth becomes unstable regardless of talent or resources. From this insight emerged the Prosperity Formula, which identifies prosperity as the result of purpose, interdependence, and trust reinforcing one another within a coherent structural configuration.

Although first articulated in response to rural poverty, the formula proved applicable far beyond its origin, describing kibbutzim and corporations, villages and nations alike. The structural configuration remained constant across contexts, yet its institutional expressions differed because each community operated within distinct environments and initial conditions. The organizing pattern endured; its manifestations adapted.

From Social Structure to Structural Recurrence

When the Prosperity Formula proved stable across diverse social settings, the question it raised became increasingly difficult to set aside. If a single structural configuration could describe prosperity in communities separated by geography, culture, and time, then what we were observing was unlikely to be merely a social insight; it suggested the presence of a more general organizing principle.

The formula is concise yet demanding in its implications, because purpose provides direction, interdependence binds differentiated roles into a functional whole, and trust reduces friction, enabling coordination to expand without disintegration. When these elements reinforce one another, capability compounds across time; when one weakens, progress becomes fragile. This internal dynamic appeared consistently across institutions that differed dramatically in design and history, not because those institutions were identical, but because the relationships among their internal components followed a similar structural configuration.

At that point, the inquiry widened beyond the social domain and the question became unavoidable: was this alignment principle unique to societies, or was it a particular manifestation of a broader law governing how systems evolve across layers of existence. We turned outward not to impose analogy, but to test recurrence.

In physics, atoms persist when attractive and repulsive forces are held in constrained balance under quantized limits, because stability does not arise from eliminating tension but from confining it within allowable states. In chemistry, molecules form when atoms resolve valence pressures through bonding that lowers free energy, so that order emerges not from the absence of competing forces but from their integration into more stable arrangements. In biology, life persists when replication, metabolism, and selection operate together across time, as energy flows through organized pathways, information is preserved with sufficient fidelity, and variation is filtered by environmental constraint. Organisms survive not by escaping pressure but by structuring their response to it.

Across these layers, a recognizable pattern recurred: systems increased in capability when internal tensions were contained within ordered arrangements and redirected rather than released; interdependence deepened as complexity expanded; and new functions emerged that were impossible at lower levels of organization.

This recurring configuration, observed independently across domains, became what we later called the Universal Law of Increasing Complexity. It does not assert inevitable ascent. It states that when tension is structurally contained and directed, higher coordination becomes possible, and when containment fails, systems fragment and regress. By law we mean not a deterministic command of nature but a recurring structural condition that appears whenever systems sustain higher orders of coordination across distinct domains.

What began as a formula for prosperity now appeared as one local expression of a broader organizing principle operating across multiple layers of existence. The pattern can be visualized as a ladder of increasing coordination, with the ordering indicating structural succession rather than superiority.

The Reverse Journey

If the Universal Law of Increasing Complexity is more than a social insight, then the Prosperity Formula must be understood as one of its expressions rather than its source. The question therefore shifts from extension to verification. We must ask whether the same organizing principle can be identified in earlier layers of existence without distortion and whether it emerges there independently of social interpretation.

The expressions that follow are structural abstractions rather than literal equations within a single mathematical system. They do not claim that social direction can be derived from quantum mechanics or that biological selection reduces to molecular bonding. They function as structural diagnostics rather than predictive models, identifying the conditions under which coordination stabilizes or dissipates without attempting to exhaust the contextual variables present in each domain.

We begin with physics. At the subatomic and atomic levels, matter persists only when opposing forces are held in constrained equilibrium. Attraction and repulsion coexist within defined limits, and electrons do not collapse into nuclei because the structure of physical reality does not permit arbitrary configurations of energy and position. What quantum mechanics describes as discrete states reflects this structural constraint rather than imposing it. Stability is therefore not the absence of tension but its containment within structured boundaries. When that containment fails, atoms transform or decay.

We turn to chemistry. Atoms alone possess a limited functional range, whereas molecules arise when valence tensions are resolved through bonding arrangements that lower free energy. Chemical order appears when competing energetic tendencies are integrated into configurations more stable than their isolated components. Not every thermodynamically favorable arrangement materializes, because kinetics and activation barriers constrain accessible pathways. Yet when bonding successfully contains and integrates opposing tendencies, the resulting structures display properties that no isolated atom could express.

We turn to biology. Molecules become organized into self-maintaining systems capable of replication, metabolism, and adaptive response. Persistence now depends not merely on static bonding but on dynamic coordination across time, as energy flows through structured pathways, information is preserved with sufficient fidelity, and variation is filtered by environmental constraint. Biological continuity requires that internal tensions be regulated through homeostatic processes rather than eliminated. When replication, metabolism, and selection operate in coordinated alignment, living systems maintain complexity against thermodynamic drift; when alignment weakens, persistence becomes unstable.

We return to society, where human communities consist of symbolic beings capable of shared meaning, role differentiation, and institutional design. Individuals pursue goals within structured systems of exchange, and prosperity arises when direction is sufficiently shared to align action across differences, when roles are interdependent rather than isolated, and when trust reduces friction and enables coordination to scale without disintegration. By purpose we do not mean ideological uniformity, but coherent direction that allows diverse actors to move along a common trajectory. Systems may accumulate wealth through coercion or asymmetry, yet without shared alignment such accumulation remains structurally unstable across time.

Finally, we consider civilization at the supranational scale, where societies interact under shared ecological and geopolitical constraints that no single state can resolve alone. Long-term resilience depends on mechanisms that contain conflict, integrate institutions, and sustain direction across plural and interdependent communities. When antagonism overwhelms coordination, fragmentation follows; when disagreement is structured rather than suppressed, collective capability expands.

Across layers, the variables differ, the mechanisms vary, and the explanatory languages change. Yet a recognizable structural relationship persists. For clarity, the structural expressions across layers can be viewed in parallel. The stabilizing gradient does not imply intention or teleology; it refers to the structural tendency, visible in hindsight, by which contained tension resolves into more durable coordination, sometimes creating conditions for the emergence of a higher layer.

Presented side by side, these expressions do not imply identity of mechanism but recurrence of an organizing relationship. Each layer contains its own variables, constraints, and explanatory vocabulary, yet in every case higher coordination becomes possible when internal tensions are structured, integrated, and stabilized across time rather than released.

Universality, Variation, Flexibility, and Fragility

At this stage, a reasonable concern arises: the formulas are symmetrical and the pattern appears clean. Does such symmetry erase difference, or imply that one structural answer governs every domain of existence?

The answer is no, because each layer embodies a distinct configuration of complexity and a different strength of internal connection. The structural law remains constant, yet the nature of binding, flexibility, and variation shifts profoundly across layers of organization.

At the most fundamental level lie subatomic particles. Electrons are indistinguishable from one another, as are protons and other elementary particles of the same type. Their intrinsic properties do not vary across the observable universe, and their degrees of freedom are tightly constrained by fundamental interactions. Variation at this layer is therefore minimal. Identity is uniform, and stability reflects maximal structural constraint combined with minimal flexibility.

In atomic physics, particles combine under nuclear and electromagnetic interactions to form atoms within quantized states. The energy required to divide an atomic nucleus is immense, and atomic persistence reflects exceptionally strong containment arising from quantization and force equilibrium rather than from the absence of tension. That strength, however, restricts variation, because only a finite range of atomic configurations can remain stable under physical constraints. High binding strength therefore produces rigidity, and rigidity limits the diversity of possible forms.

In chemistry, relational complexity increases while binding strength decreases relative to nuclear forces. Molecular bonds require far less energy to rearrange, which allows atoms to combine in vastly more configurations than are possible at the atomic level alone. Chemical order emerges when valence tensions are resolved through bonding arrangements that lower free energy, and within these energetic limits combinatorial diversity expands dramatically. Reduced binding strength thus enables the proliferation of molecular forms, allowing properties to emerge that no isolated atom could express.

In biology, complexity intensifies not only in relational structure but in temporal continuity, as molecules become organized into self-maintaining systems capable of replication, metabolism, and adaptive response. Cells differentiate, organisms specialize, and ecosystems interconnect through networks of energy flow and information exchange that extend far beyond static chemical bonding. Biological cohesion depends less on fixed structural bonds and more on continuous metabolic maintenance and the preservation of informational integrity across time. Although the energy required to disrupt an organism is vastly smaller than that required to divide an atomic nucleus, living systems display extraordinary diversity precisely because they are dynamically maintained rather than rigidly fixed. Flexibility expands further at this layer, yet persistence now depends on sustained coordination among processes rather than on force equilibrium alone, allowing variation to accumulate and evolution to unfold.

At the social layer, complexity shifts decisively from material and metabolic coordination toward symbolic and institutional organization, as human beings construct systems of meaning, role differentiation, and exchange that depend not on physical force but on shared interpretation. Institutions, markets, and norms operate through agreements that must be continuously enacted and maintained rather than mechanically enforced, and collective coordination therefore rests on direction, interdependence, and trust. Unlike chemical bonds or biological metabolism, these binding mechanisms are intangible and require ongoing reinforcement through communication, legitimacy, and expectation. Social structures may appear stable across years or decades, yet their internal alignments evolve continuously as roles adjust, confidence shifts, and shared direction is renegotiated in response to changing conditions. Flexibility reaches its highest expression at this level because coordination can reorganize rapidly, yet that same flexibility increases sensitivity to disruption, making durability dependent on sustained structural alignment rather than physical constraint.

At the civilizational scale, coordination extends beyond individual societies and operates across ecological, technological, and geopolitical systems that encompass the planet as a whole. Material constraints remain operative, yet organizational structures expand beyond national boundaries, and symbolic narratives acquire the capacity to coordinate action across vast cultural and institutional diversity. Capability increases because larger systems can integrate resources, knowledge, and infrastructure at unprecedented scale, yet vulnerability increases as well, since coordination depends on agreements that must be continually renewed rather than enforced by direct physical constraint. Civilizational stability, therefore, depends not on eliminating difference but on structuring disagreement and aligning direction across plural and interdependent societies.

Across layers, the structural law remains constant while the form of containment changes. At the earliest levels, cohesion is enforced by fundamental forces and maximal constraint. As complexity increases, binding shifts from physical compulsion toward organized coordination and symbolic alignment. Strong physical bonds limit variation and produce rigidity, whereas weaker and more flexible forms of binding permit diversity but require continuous coordination to prevent disintegration. Higher orders of organization therefore gain expanded capability precisely because they allow variation, yet they simultaneously become more sensitive to structural failure.

A universal formula does not dictate a single institutional outcome. It identifies the structural conditions under which higher coordination becomes possible. In society, direction, interdependence, and trust define the organizing configuration through which capability compounds, yet a kibbutz, a corporation, a tribe, or a nation will express that configuration differently because their histories, environments, and initial conditions differ. The structure remains constant, while its realizations remain contingent upon context.

The same structural logic applies in earlier layers of existence. The subatomic configuration yields indistinguishable particles constrained by fundamental interactions. The atomic configuration permits only a finite range of stable elements under quantized force equilibrium. The chemical configuration allows vast molecular diversity because bonding flexibility expands the space of possible combinations. The biological configuration generates branching evolutionary lineages as variation interacts with selection across time. As flexibility increases across layers, variation multiplies, and with it the potential for new forms of coordination.

The law does not guarantee ascent, because any principle that explains emergence must also account for collapse. Atomic structures can decay, molecular bonds can dissolve, organisms can fail to sustain themselves, and societies can fragment once they lose the capacity to contain internal tension. When contradiction is no longer structured and redirected, it is released; as containment weakens, coordination dissolves and systems revert to simpler forms of organization. Increasing complexity is therefore conditional rather than inevitable, directional when tension is held within structure and regressive when that structure fails. Universality does not imply permanent ascent, but identifies the structural condition that governs both expansion and simplification.

Structural Lineage and the Logic of Return

The path traced here stands in continuity with established knowledge across disciplines, but the sequence must be understood in terms of structural emergence rather than the order in which the sciences developed. At the most fundamental level, quantum theory clarified the constraints governing subatomic particles and the discrete conditions under which energy and position are structured. At the atomic level, nuclear and electromagnetic physics explained how quantized interactions permit stable configurations of matter. Thermodynamics and physical chemistry then described how energetic tendencies shape molecular organization and how local order can persist even as entropy increases globally. Evolutionary theory illuminated how variation, replication, and selection generate biological complexity across time. Finally, the social sciences examined how institutions, norms, incentives, and power structures channel collective behavior and enable coordination within human communities. Each discipline illuminated a distinct layer in the ascent from minimal variation and maximal constraint toward expanding organization and flexibility, even when operating within its own vocabulary and methodological boundaries.

What this column proposes is neither a replacement for those insights nor a reduction of one domain into another, but a connective principle that renders their recurrence intelligible. Across domains, systems expand their capabilities when internal tensions are contained within ordered configurations and redirected toward coordinated function. Although the language differs from physics to biology to economics, and although the mechanisms remain irreducibly distinct, the organizing logic recurs; contradiction is not eliminated but structured, and pressure is not denied but metabolized within systems capable of sustaining higher coordination.

The investigation began with prosperity because that was the concrete problem before us. Farmers worked with discipline and knowledge, yet economic stability failed to consolidate, making clear that the puzzle was not moral but structural. The question became under what configuration coordination accumulates rather than dissipates, and the answer took the form of the Prosperity Formula, which identified direction, interdependence, and trust as the generative alignment through which communities transform effort into durable advancement. Only afterward did it become evident that this configuration expressed a broader pattern already visible in earlier layers of existence.

The outward journey revealed structural recurrence across physics, chemistry, and biology, while the return journey clarified that social alignment is not exceptional but continuous with prior forms of organization. What appears in society as shared direction, interdependent roles, and trust reflects the same underlying relationship between tension and containment that stabilizes molecular bonding and atomic equilibrium. The domains differ profoundly in substance, scale, and mechanism, yet the structural principle through which opposing forces are integrated into durable coordination persists across them.

If this continuity holds, then human institutions are not separate from the physical universe that produced them. The atoms forged in stellar interiors now participate in markets, legal systems, and shared narratives. The difference between matter and meaning is therefore not a rupture in law, but an increase in organized complexity through which physical coordination extends into symbolic and institutional forms. What changes across layers is not the underlying structural condition, but the medium through which tension is contained and directed.

The Universal Law of Increasing Complexity does not promise progress or romanticize ascent; it identifies the condition under which higher coordination becomes possible. When tension is structured and directed, capability grows, whereas when containment fails, systems simplify. This condition applies to nuclei, to organisms, and to societies alike.

We do not step outside the universe when we build economies and institutions; we continue its pattern in another form. If continuity across layers is real, human systems are neither exempt from universal constraint nor determined by it, but operate within the same structural condition that governs matter itself, namely that tension must be contained and directed for coordination to increase. The difference at the social layer lies not in the law but in the medium through which containment occurs: in atoms, equilibrium is enforced by force; in organisms, it is maintained by metabolism and information; and in societies, it depends on institutional design and shared direction. The universality of the law therefore does not diminish human agency but clarifies the conditions under which higher coordination becomes possible.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-==-==

For any matter, contact me at +972-54-2523425

Subscribe here, free!

"Mental and Economic Freedom Are Interconnected."

See you soon,

Nimrod

Dr. Nimrod Israely is the CEO and Founder of Dream Valley and Biofeed companies and the Chairman and Co-founder of the IBMA conference. +972-54-2523425 (WhatsApp), or email nisraely@biofeed.co.il

P.S.

If you missed it, here is a link to last week's blog, “The Law of Nested Emergence“.

P.P.S.

Here are ways we can work together to help your agro sector and rural communities step forward and shift from poverty into ongoing prosperity:

* Nova Kibbutz and consultancy on rural communities' models.

* Local & National programs related to agro-produce export models - Dream Valley global vertical value and supply chain business model and concept connects (a) input suppliers with farmers in developing economies and (b) those farmers with consumers in premium markets.

* Crop protection: Biofeed, an eco-friendly zero-spray control technology and protocol.

You can follow me on LinkedIn, YouTube, and Facebook. 

*This article addresses general phenomena. The mention of a country/continent is used for illustration purposes only.