Source
Aerts (2009), LIT-934, read in full in NOTE-808: the ℝ⁸ model with one emergent subspace per pair (eqs. 61–62, Tables 3–4) and the two-layer reading of thought (§§1.6, 3.4).
What is asserted, and by whom
The thesis is that what carries the guppy effect is emergence: the combined concept “pet-fish” is partly a new concept, not the meet of “pet” and “fish”, and the data show thought running in a classical logical layer and a quantum conceptual layer at once. Aerts asserts it (NOTE-808, C5 moderate, C6 weak). It is one of the answers QUESTION-156 is after, the one that drops conjunction-as-meet by adding a component outside the lattice.
What the record holds toward it
- THEORY-255 (Active): Theorem 9, that taking conjunction and disjunction as meet and join with an order-preserving weight cannot produce over- or underextension, in Aerts’s model and, by the record’s own check, in any such lattice. That rules out the lattice meet; it does not choose emergence over the other ways out.
- The ℝ⁸ fit to all of Hampton’s items (NOTE-808, C5) is a model with a free parameter per item, so its fit is not a test.
What would confirm or reject it
A predictive emergent-component model on other data confirms it; an equally economical model with no emergent component, which places the deviation in a non-meet operation on the parts or in a non-monotone weight, rejects the emergence reading as the explanation. QUESTION-156 asks which models drop which assumption; this entry is Aerts’s answer.