Systemic Falsifiability: What Would Actually Disprove SignalRupture

Systemic Falsifiability: What Would Actually Disprove SignalRupture formalizes the conditions under which the SignalRupture (SR) paradigm can be meaningfully challenged. SR is a system‑layer framework describing how governance architectures behave under rising complexity, drift, and capacity strain. Because SR models generative structural dynamics rather than local outputs, it cannot be validated or invalidated through isolated datasets, bounded case studies, or short‑horizon observations. This paper clarifies the distinction between local contradiction—expected under drift—and structural deviation, which is the only relevant standard for falsifying a system‑layer paradigm. It defines the cross‑domain, long‑horizon empirical patterns that must emerge if SR is correct, and the patterns whose sustained absence would constitute a legitimate contradiction. The result is a rigorous, non‑self‑sealing falsifiability architecture that keeps SR empirically constrained while preserving its system‑layer altitude.