Of course, this has consequences.
Any economy, human or otherwise, is driven by thermodynamics - and, by this definition, has to have a gravitational process feeding it.
In further consequence, it, in itself, cannot return a profit. Ever.
“In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.”
That's the Second law.
Of Thermodynamics.
But there is more.
Much more.
For instance, what do you call a system that is dependent on another system (dynamically) feeding it and (statically) maintaining it every nanosecond of its existence?
This forms the basis of all religions in the world - a least of those that concern themselves with human (and, if honest, non- human) existence; i. e., with that what we call "Creation" - the one with a big C.
And there is more, far more, which I will randomly touch upon in more detail in time as this goes on.
Oh, and, speaking of time, a word of caution:
As this endeavor is not what we call "scientific theory" it is not to be proven or disproven, which would be no more than a distraction and a waste of time, simply because all scientific proof or disproof is but temporary, and there is no way of discerning which proof will hold up in the future, or even when that future will be or end.
For what we are talking about here, friends, is eternity.
Far beyond the universe.
So please take it as a suggestion, a proposal, a possibility, a vision, or leave it - perhaps for others.
There may be a bit more needed to accept it:
Economy may have to accept that it cannot create material values, but requires them
Religion may have to accept that Creation is an eternal and ubiquitous process
Science may have to accept that decay is not the primary state of the universe
Fat chance…
all three constitute vanities.
On the other hand… the acceptance of the contrary is not really self-deprecating:
· The reason humans cannot create a physical, material value is that they already are one themselves. They already are the result of an ongoing creative process, of which they are part.
· The fact that this creative process did not begin and end with the construction of this one particular planet, its surroundings and its inhabitants, or even the whole universe as the end result, makes it all the greater a process to be the momentary and local result of, and changes nothing in particular to human life.
· Accepting that decay is necessarily a secondary state to creation, and equally, or most probably, Creation - the construction of such order that results in what we call the Cosmos - retains the upper hand (or at least did so as the momentary result of the last dozen billion of years), and therefore prevails, does not refute the laws of the universe as discerned by science - and won't.