Pre-Semantic Structural Revelation and the Non-Causal Geometry of Admissibility

This publication formalizes a previously implicit but structurally necessary layer within the PETRONUS™ / ΔE™ / UTAM™ / ONTOΣ™ framework: pre-semantic structural revelation. The work demonstrates that long-horizon adaptive systems require a mode of observability in which relational geometry and constraint topology become visible prior to semantic interpretation, intentional attribution, or causal regulation. This layer does not perform inference, does not generate meaning, and does not authorize action. Instead, it exposes admissibility boundaries that constrain future evolution without entering the causal decision surface. The core contribution is the identification and formal positioning of this layer as a solution to a fundamental architectural tension: how a system can observe approaching structural inadmissibility without collapsing into meta-control, optimization, or reflexive self-intervention. By enforcing strict non-causality, non-semanticity, and non-commitment, pre-semantic structural revelation preserves observational independence under irreversible interaction, finite internal time, and accumulated structural drift. The addendum strengthens the axiom of structural non-causality of admissibility, clarifying how structural state may become observable without becoming actionable. It shows that meaning is not inferred from perception but admitted later through internal-time-bounded stabilization and commitment authorization. Exposing admissibility as causal feedback is proven to induce reflexive collapse and loss of long-horizon viability. Architecturally, this work anchors the framework within a new classification termed Cybernetics of order 2.5 - positioned deliberately between second-order cybernetics (where observation influences regulation) and third-order cybernetics (where reflexivity becomes optimizable). Cybernetics 2.5 preserves reflexivity without control, observation without optimization, and awareness without collapse. This text introduces no mechanisms or implementations. It functions as a structural clarification and theoretical anchor, closing an architectural gap between observation and regulation and stabilizing the axiomatic core against misclassification. It constitutes part of a consolidated public prior-art corpus and serves as a foundational element of an emerging school concerned with identity preservation, coherence, and viability in long-horizon adaptive systems