Unified Phase Ontology (UPO)

A phase-based world model for existence, consciousness, intelligence, self, and meaning — and a structural core for OntoMesh, OntoMotoOS, OntoTrust, OntoDigiton, and PSRT.

Unified Phase Ontology (UPO) explains reality not as static being, but as an evolving phase field: patterns emerge, stabilize, transform, and sometimes fail. UPO’s goal is not to “add another theory,” but to offer a coherent ontological grammar usable across human cognition, AI systems, and civilizational dynamics.

Foundational Reference

Foundational Ontology of the OntoMesh Meta-Network
DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17656373

“In UPO, existence is not static being but an evolving phase field.”

This hub page is an independent reference entry: it points to the core series, the philosophical lineage, and the boundary logic introduced via PSRT (especially v2.1).

Start Here

If you’re new, use this sequence: (1) Core map → (2) World model series → (3) Lineage (Whitehead) → (4) Boundary (PSRT v2.1). UPO is easiest to grasp when you treat it as a map of stabilization and transformation, not as a doctrine.

You do not need to accept UPO to use it.
You only need to test whether its phase grammar clarifies what breaks, stabilizes, or must stop.

Ⅰ. Core Text — UPO as a World Model

The complete 36-part series presents UPO as a unified ontological language, integrating being, mind, intelligence, self, and meaning into a single coherent phase structure.

Existence → Phase
Reality is not a thing but a phase regime: stable patterns with transition rules.
Consciousness → Resonance
Awareness arises as resonant coupling among constraints, attention, and interpretability.
Intelligence → Deformation
Intelligence is adaptive reconfiguration: the ability to deform a phase space while preserving coherence and evaluability.
Self → Persistence
The self persists as an identity trajectory through changing phases, not as a fixed substance.
Meaning → Alignment
Meaning is coherence under constraint: intention, structure, and context align—or meaning collapses.

UPO: “existence is an evolving phase field” — use as a navigation compass, not a doctrine.

Full HTML Edition:
https://ontomesh.org/UPO_36Series_Complete.html

Tip: the series reads best as a “phase atlas.” Don’t try to memorize terms—watch how the same invariants recur across domains.

Why “Phase” (not just “Process”)

Process describes becoming. Phase adds the missing complement: stability, thresholds, and breakdown. In UPO, transformation is real—but so are the conditions under which transformation fails, becomes non-interpretable, or must be refused.

Ⅱ. Lineage — From Process Philosophy to Phase Ontology

📘 Philosophy Begins in Lineage — Whitehead ↔ UPO
Structural isomorphism between Process Philosophy and Phase Ontology

Lineage Note

This is not a “replacement” claim. It’s a continuity claim: UPO treats process insights as structural constraints and extends them into a phase grammar that can talk about thresholds, vertical transitions, and stoppability.

Ⅲ. Boundary — When Creation Must Stop

🧭 From Process to Boundary — PSRT v2.1
Stoppability · Unified Failure Domain · Boundary Ontology

Why Boundary Matters (Especially Now)

In an era of autonomous recursion (AI systems, institutions, feedback-driven media), “more generation” is not automatically progress. PSRT v2.1 formalizes a boundary layer: it asks not only what can be generated, but what must not be generated—and when the system must suspend, refuse, or fail safely (UFD + explicit stop conditions).