Input: Curiosity capital (abundant but non-convertible).
Filter: Exploitation leverage (controlled, selective).
Distortion: Time lag (delaying recognition).
Loss: Intellectual waste (discarded output).
Output: Asymmetric reward (wealth captured elsewhere).
This funnel explains why societies produce cemeteries of genius: the system is designed not to nurture disruptive creators, but to extract, delay, or discard their contributions.
Core Thesis:
The structure of genius--wealth asymmetry is systemic, not accidental. It is the predictable outcome of architectures that equate wealth with exploitation capacity rather than originality, and present utility rather than anticipatory value. The illusion that genius "should" be wealthy survives because paradigms disguise this asymmetry as natural law, moral lesson, or functional necessity.
V. Methodological Implications
The Theory of Genius--Wealth Illusion is not merely philosophical provocation; it proposes a new analytic framework with methodological consequences for economics, sociology, and the philosophy of science. If wealth and genius inhabit different ontological orders and their relation is structurally asymmetric, then our methods of studying genius and wealth must change accordingly.
1. From Aggregate Metrics to Structural Tracing
Mainstream economics measures value in terms of aggregate output (GDP, patents, productivity). This approach erases the structural asymmetry by equating production with reward. Our framework suggests a different methodology: tracing the trajectory of specific intellectual contributions---who created them, who recognized them, who monetized them, and who was excluded. This genealogical tracing can reveal patterns of asymmetric reward and intellectual waste invisible to aggregate statistics.
2. Temporal Methodology: Lag Analysis
Traditional models assume synchronicity between innovation and reward. Yet our framework emphasizes the time lag paradox. Methodologically, this requires longitudinal studies tracking the interval between the moment of creation, institutional recognition, and economic monetization. For example, quantifying the average recognition lag in art history or mathematics could empirically confirm systemic blindness.
3. Counterfactual Reconstruction
Because intellectual waste is systemic, reconstructing what was lost or ignored becomes central. Counterfactual methodology---asking "what would have happened if this genius had been institutionally supported?"---exposes the scale of missed opportunities. For instance, counterfactual simulations of Tesla's wireless transmission suggest radically different trajectories for energy infrastructure. These exercises demonstrate how systemic blindness reshapes not only personal fates but civilizational futures.
4. Asymmetry Indexes
