Closure: does reality make sense?

Context: A theory of reality that makes sense

On the topic of the nominally closed systems referenced in the article above, much of the closure asserted (or interpreted) is at a cost of displacing or offsetting the external dependencies of those systems.

Yes, there is a certain degree of ontological individuation without which rationality and logic are subject to catastrophic disassembly in a continuous chain from axiom to distributed system – but – as we approach the topic of more sophisticated complexity and material or conceptual boundaries between a thing and that which it is not, the degree and extent to which dependency is masked as a function of autonomy becomes apparent.

Autonomy in logic (or the much less precise artefacts, entities and systems that haunt our symbolic languages with constructive indeterminacy) is at a cost of masked dependency.

I agree that there are core causal properties, principles or factors at work in the Universe. I depart consensus on the topic of infinity. Personally, I think that there are very likely many more layers of complexity; algorithmic/mathematical or otherwise. The indefinitely-extensible essence of logic, of language, of technology and (to some extent) of biology and of physics resonates more closely with Cantor’s Diagonalisation method in ways that suggest we might find ourselves inhabiting an uncountable infinity.