Human legal systems and moral frameworks rest upon an implicit assumption of proportionality: that anaction ought to generate an equal, direct, and corrective reaction upon the perpetrator. However, real-world observations routinely reveal instances where severe wrongdoing escapes punishment, or where well-intentioned protective legislation inadvertently harms the very populations it aims to safeguard. This paper proposes a novel interdisciplinary framework that models legal dynamics, moral retribution,and policy outcomes through the lens of classical mechanics, thermodynamics, and complex systemstheory. We demonstrate that: (1) Unpunished moral transgressions do not violate systemic causality; rather,the reactive energy dissipates into background "social friction" (entropy) or operates on time horizonsexceeding individual human lifespans. (2) Sophisticated bad actors utilize structural complexity and riskexternalization as "shock absorbers" to decouple cause from effect. (3) The law, as a human cognitive product, is constrained by linguistic resolution and evidentiary asymmetries. (4) Aggressive, one-dimensional protective legislation triggers non-linear feedback loops—such as capital adaptation and automated labor substitution—producing the "Paradox of Intention." We conclude that effective justice and social protection require moving away from crude, high-force interventions toward continuous, multi-dimensional fine-tuning based on systemic leverage, collective mass, and automated safety buffers.
Min Jinseong (2026) studied this question.