Potential, Probability, and the Relational Turn: VII Recursive Potential and Systemic Alignment

In the previous post, we reframed quantum mechanics through readiness: the ontic field of capacities and inclinations, actualised perspectivally, with probability recast as epistemic uncertainty.

Now we turn to the recursive and systemic dynamics of potential, exploring how readiness evolves and aligns across scales.

---

1. Readiness as recursive

Readiness is not static. Each actualisation — each event, measurement, or action — modifies the relational field:

1. Local alignment: a perspectival cut selects a coherent configuration of capacities and inclinations.

2. Feedback: this actualisation changes inclinations and capacities elsewhere in the system.

3. Emergent topology: the field evolves dynamically, producing new patterns of potential and tendency.

In short, potential recursively generates its own future potential.

---

2. Systemic alignment across scales

Fields of readiness exist at multiple scales:

• Microscale: subatomic, quantum, or neural dispositions.

• Mesoscale: symbolic, social, and cognitive networks.

• Macroscale: cosmological, ecological, or collective systemic structures.

Actualisations at one scale propagate alignment constraints and directional tendencies at others, forming nested relational hierarchies of potential.

---

3. Implications for agency and intervention

Understanding recursive potential reshapes our notion of action:

• Human action is a local actualisation within broader readiness fields.

• Ethical and practical engagement requires attention to systemic feedback: every cut reverberates through nested potentials.

• Symbolic systems — language, technology, mathematics — are instruments for shaping, probing, and amplifying readiness across scales.

In essence, agency is participatory alignment, not deterministic selection.

---

4. Recursive modulation in physics

Quantum phenomena illustrate recursion naturally:

• Wavefunctions evolve according to the Schrödinger equation: each actualisation shifts the field of readiness, creating new inclinations.

• Entanglement propagates tendencies non-locally: recursive correlations emerge from prior systemic alignment.

• Decoherence reflects systemic stabilisation: local alignments feed back, producing emergent regularity from dispositional dynamics.

Here, recursion is ontological, not statistical: it is the evolution of readiness itself.

---

5. Visualising recursive potential

We can imagine the field as a dynamic network:

• Nodes = potential alignments (capacity + inclination)

• Edges = relational constraints and influence pathways

• Local cuts = events actualising a subset of nodes coherently

• Feedback loops = modification of inclinations and capacities post-actualisation

This captures the kinetic topology of relational potential across scales.

---

6. Preview of Part VIII

In the next post, we will explore the evolution of potential over time: how recursive alignment shapes tendencies, produces coherence, and enables the complex unfolding of relational systems — from quantum fields to human symbolic activity.

We will see how readiness is not merely static capacity but a living, evolving field of possibility, continuously sculpted by actualisation and relational feedback.