The current research in general topology is mostly stuck in dire details, without a system and radical innovation, while ignored research of Victor Porton (ordered semigroup actions) proposes a broad framework for the field; its significance and adoption remain subjects for independent mathematical evaluation.
General Topology Today: Activity Without Direction
Modern general topology produces a constant flow of papers, examples, and small theorems. On the surface, this looks like progress. But behind the publication counts and citation metrics lies a structural issue:
Most results are disconnected, non-systematic, and rarely integrate into a broader mathematical architecture.
This is not a failure of the discipline itself — topology is foundational.
It is a failure of the incentive system that shapes how research is done.
Academia Rewards the Wrong Things
- Quantity over coherence
- Incremental work over foundational breakthroughs
- Short publication cycles over long-term unifying theory
- Departmental hierarchy over individual merit
The result: a large volume of technical results but little effort invested in organizing the field into a unified, powerful structure.
An Alternative Approach: Unifying Topology Through Relational Algebra
Researcher Viktor Porton has proposed a radically different direction.
In his mathematical work, he fully reduced general topology (including topological spaces, uniform spaces, proximity spaces, directed graphs, Cauchy spaces, metric spaces, locales and frames, etc.) to a specific relational algebraic framework and even to universal algebra — creating:
- structural links between isolated theorems,
- connections to the rest of mathematics,
- a general architecture instead of ad hoc results.
This type of unification is exactly what mathematics needs — yet it is rarely supported inside the traditional university environment, where systemic innovation is often discouraged simply because it does not fit the standard publication model.
The Problem: Institutions Are Funded, Not Discoveries
Porton has publicly described obstacles in his academic path, including the fact that he does not hold a formal professorship due to earlier institutional barriers and conflicts.
Whether one interprets these experiences individually or as symptoms of a broader trend, they highlight a structural truth:
Traditional academia does not support independent researchers who pursue system-level breakthroughs outside established hierarchies.
Funding flows to:
- departments,
- administrators,
- committees,
- and institutional prestige…
…not to the individuals who make discoveries.
AIIM: A New Funding Architecture for Global Science
The AI Internet Meritocracy (AIIM) offers a very different vision for scientific progress.
→ https://science-dao.org/meritocracy/
Its central principle is simple but transformative:
Fund the discovery, not the institution.
Under AIIM:
- Every scientific result is evaluated on its own merit.
- Money flows directly to the researcher who made the breakthrough.
- No hierarchy, no department chairs, no gatekeepers.
- Researchers gain full freedom to choose partners, collaborators, and directions.
- High-impact discoveries receive high-impact rewards.
- Fundamental, unifying work becomes economically viable.
This is the environment in which foundational ideas — such as reducing topology to relational algebra — can flourish.
Why Science Needs Meritocracy
Scientific creativity requires:
- freedom instead of bureaucracy
- structural innovation instead of metric-driven output
- global collaboration instead of departmental silos
- courage to pursue deep, unifying ideas
- a fair system that rewards real breakthroughs
The future of research will not be built on the quantity of publications.
It will be built on coherent, transformative contributions — the kind academia currently struggles to support.
AIIM provides a path toward a scientific ecosystem where every researcher, regardless of affiliation, can be recognized and funded for genuine progress.
Call to Action
If you believe that science should reward real discoveries — not administrative structures — explore how AIIM works and join the effort to build a merit-based global research economy:
👉 Learn more: https://science-dao.org/meritocracy/
👉 Support the development of independent, foundational research: https://science-dao.org/donation/
👉 Help fund the next public test of AIIM.
Help Test a New Way to Fund Science
AI Internet-Meritocracy (AIIM) is an operational beta designed to allocate available donations to researchers and open-source developers using AI-assisted evaluation of documented contributions. Payment transactions are already recorded on-chain.
The next major evidence milestone is a proposed five-month public adversarial test of the allocation model, with $1,000 distributed to eligible funding recipients. Donations help pay for the development, infrastructure, reviewer and participant recruitment, outreach, and operating work needed to reach and evaluate that milestone.
You do not need to assume AIIM is already proven to support the project. Your donation helps turn the proposal into evidence: what works, what fails, and what should change.
Support the next testing milestone → Read the test proposal →
Independent review
Researchers and technical reviewers: independent criticism is welcome, including negative conclusions. Review AIIM’s assumptions, governance, failure modes, and testing plan →
Research status: AIIM remains experimental. AI-generated evaluations can contain factual errors or biases, and decentralized governance and non-custodial components remain under development. That uncertainty is why public testing, auditability, and external criticism are central to the project.