The 2028-2032 window should be treated as a fork hypothesis. The relevant question is whether identity, money, computation, energy, and contact narratives remain interoperable across populations or crystallize into incompatible consensus channels.
Core Threads
See The Bifurcation for the consensus-split model.
See The Programmable Compliance Infrastructure for the identity and permissions rail.
See The Monetary Transition Architecture for the financial rail.
See The Kardashev Inversion for the distinction among power, coherence, custody, and retained capacity.
See Consensus Reality for the mechanism by which different synchronized populations can stabilize different worlds.
Event Criteria
Events belong in this window when they lock in incompatibility: identity systems that exclude nonparticipants, currencies that enforce behavior, energy systems that split dependency from sovereignty, AI systems that mediate access to institutions, or contact narratives that sort populations into incompatible ontologies.
Open Questions
Which incompatibilities become reversible interface problems, and which become hard forks? Which communities retain the ability to transact, learn, heal, publish, travel, and coordinate outside centralized permissioning? Which predictions deserve confidence only after 2027 evidence arrives?
References
Gibson, William. “The Science in Science Fiction.” NPR Talk of the Nation, 30 November 1999.
Ostrom, Elinor. Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action. Cambridge University Press, 1990.
Arthur, W. Brian. The Nature of Technology: What It Is and How It Evolves. Free Press, 2009.