That’s not true. The operations available in set a, and consequential set b are

That’s not true. The operations available in set a, and consequential set b are different, but they are directionally the same. There is no difference between the logic of spin (charge), the logic of mass accumulation, and the logic of cooperative accumulation. We may be discussing different operations but as capital it’s the same.

One of the ways brad and I test a first principle is whether it satisfies the ternary logic’s demand for capital accumulation, loss, equilibrium. Just as we test if for composability at it’s emergent scale (new operations available), it’s constructability from the first principles of the prior scale, and the constructability of the first principles of the subsequent scale.

This the test of consistency and coherence of the first principles at all scales. when we discover those rules we know we have correctly specified the first principles.