Markets Don’t Reset - Neither Does Reasoning

Why I Wrote Logica Quanta — And Why It Matters for Investors

From time to time, readers ask why a fund manager would spend time writing about quantum physics at all.

The short answer is that Logica Quanta was never written as a physics book in the conventional sense. It was written as a book about logical reasoning under constraint — and quantum mechanics simply happens to be the cleanest place we know where logic, observation, and irreversibility collide.

At its core, Logica Quanta questions how reasoning works when outcomes are definite, history matters, and systems do not reset. That line of inquiry may meet resistance. Quantum physics has accumulated a rich landscape of interpretations over the past century — some deeply elegant, some explicitly philosophical, and some leaning toward mysticism or multiverse narratives. Many people are understandably attached to these frameworks.

This book does not dismiss them rudely, nor does it attempt to win an argument. It simply asks a narrower question:

Given what is observed, what explanations remain logically constrained — and what do they cost?

That posture — refusing to argue, insisting on constraints — is precisely what makes the exercise useful beyond physics.

From Quantum Decoherence to Economic Reality

Modern macroeconomic theory is often taught as if systems are, in principle, reversible. Shocks occur. Policies respond. Equilibria are restored. The language of “normalization” and “reset” is everywhere.

But the real economy does not behave that way.

Just as a quantum system that has interacted with its environment cannot be “un-observed,” an economy that has accumulated debt, institutional commitments, behavioral scars, and policy precedents does not return to its prior state. It decoheres. History is recorded in structure.

This is not a metaphor imported into economics for stylistic effect. It is a logical consequence of studying systems where interaction leaves residue.

The core argument of Logica Quanta — that outcomes impose constraints and irreversibility is real — helped sharpen how I think about macroeconomics and finance. Not because markets are quantum, but because both domains punish reasoning that assumes clean resets where none exist.

Why This Matters for Investment Thinking

As a fund manager, my job is not to defend theories. It is to navigate reality.

Financial markets, like quantum measurements, deliver outcomes — not distributions. Losses are not symmetric with gains. Drawdowns are not erased by subsequent rallies. Portfolios remember stress even when prices appear calm.

Thinking clearly about irreversibility, path dependence, and constraint is not an academic indulgence. It is central to risk management.

My background in markets gives me the freedom to approach physics without institutional allegiance. And my side passion for quantum reasoning gives me the freedom, in finance, to step outside groupthink and policy narratives when they stop matching observed behavior.

Pulling Ourselves Back to Reality

This blog is, and will remain, an investment and macroeconomic platform. But occasionally, it is useful to step back and ask where our reasoning habits come from.

Logica Quanta is an attempt to pull reasoning back toward logic, constraint, and consequence — away from comfort narratives, whether in physics or economics.

The quantum world does not reset once observed.
The macroeconomic world does not reset once stressed.

Recognizing this is not pessimism. It is realism.

For readers interested in the deeper logical foundations behind this perspective, the book Logica Quanta – The Evasive Logic of Quantum Physics is available here:
👉 https://a.co/d/01YG3el8

It is not required reading for investing — but it explains why, in markets as in physics, irreversibility is the rule, not the exception.