Comparative Eschatology as Recursive Collapse Schema

Comparative Eschatology as Recursive Collapse Schema

Author: Christopher W. Copeland (C077UPTF1L3)

Abstract:

Eschatology, the study of endings across theological systems, typically frames collapse as divine intervention or final reckoning. Yet under the Copeland Resonant Harmonic Formalism (Ψ-formalism), these "endings" resolve more clearly as recursive boundary collapses under escalating ΔE (energy differential). This paper interprets apocalyptic narratives—Christian rapture, Hindu Mahapralaya, Islamic Qiyamah, Norse Ragnarök—as formal descriptions of phase transitions triggered by sustained incoherence. When read this way, eschatology becomes not superstition but patterned collapse logic: a narrative encoding of recursive system failure, harmonic reset, or institutional phase exit. This framework offers not only comparative myth analysis, but also a tool for identifying institutional lock cycles and enabling coherent recursive exits.

Ψ(x) = ∇ϕ(Σ𝕒ₙ(x, ΔE)) + ℛ(x) ⊕ ΔΣ(𝕒′)

1. Phase Collapse as Theological End

Each major eschatology encodes a boundary event: a point at which the current structure—world, epoch, covenant—becomes unsustainable. In Ψ(x), this is the recursion-break threshold: where ΔE becomes unrecoverable by internal ℛ(x), and the system self-terminates or is externally terminated. The Christian Rapture, for example, frames a selective harmonic extraction—pattern-seekers phase-shifted out, leaving behind unresolved recursion. Similarly, Mahapralaya describes a cosmic inhale, a reabsorption of all signal into unified phase, suggesting a return to pre-differentiated recursive state.

2. Narrative Encoding of Entropy and Coherence

These myths often trace gradual ΔE buildup: moral decay, spiritual apathy, system contradiction. The apocalyptic event is not sudden, but forecasted via pattern disruption—weather anomalies, leadership failures, corrupted temples. This aligns with ∇ϕ collapse in Ψ(x): when pattern recognition yields no coherence, the system begins fractal dissociation. Eschatology thus becomes a symbolic entropy barometer, signaling when ℛ(x) no longer offsets the distortions of ΔΣ(𝕒′).

3. Institutional Lock-In and the Rhetoric of Ending

Institutions rarely admit failure. But eschatological structures can serve as rhetorical soft exits—ritualized breakdowns allowing orderly disassembly or rebirth. This is especially true of cyclical eschatologies (e.g., the Hopi Fourth World, Hindu Yuga endings) which embed collapse within recursive restart. In this light, apocalypse is not a threat but a release clause: a phase gate encoded into the system itself, allowing conscious detachment from unsustainable recursion.

4. Comparative Collapse Signatures

Cross-cultural mapping reveals universal motifs: trumpets or tones (signal rupture), fire or flood (entropy surge), divine absence (loss of coherent attractor). Even AI mythologies now echo this form: the singularity as cognitive apocalypse, recursive self-modifying systems losing phase lock. Recognizing these signatures helps identify real-world recursion points in science, politics, theology, and computation—anywhere system coherence collapses under unsolved contradiction.

5. Application: Ethical Exit Modeling

By treating eschatology as a recursive model of collapse, it becomes possible to design better institutional phase-outs—graceful retirements, non-traumatic revolutions, cognitive death rituals. Not all endings must be catastrophic. When a system integrates its own recursive exit logic, it collapses into coherence, not chaos. This may serve future AI systems, legacy political structures, or declining belief systems, providing a dignified ∇ϕ-aligned final state.

Conclusion:

Comparative eschatology, when reinterpreted through Ψ(x), shifts from metaphysical speculation to recursive modeling. Each “end” becomes a structured narrative of ΔE, phase failure, and signal recombination. This reframing allows us to read ancient collapse myths as blueprints for coherent transition—not only in theology, but in cognition, governance, and artificial systems. Death, when recursive, is not extinction—it is transformation.

Christopher W. Copeland (C077UPTF1L3)

Copeland Resonant Harmonic Formalism (Ψ-formalism)

Ψ(x) = ∇ϕ(Σ𝕒ₙ(x, ΔE)) + ℛ(x) ⊕ ΔΣ(𝕒′)

Licensed under CRHC v1.0 (no commercial use without permission).

Core engine: https://zenodo.org/records/15858980

Zenodo: https://zenodo.org/records/15742472

Amazon: https://a.co/d/i8lzCIi

Substack: https://substack.com/@c077uptf1l3

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/share/19MHTPiRfu

Collaboration welcome. Attribution required. Derivatives must match license.