Note: The Ontological Asymmetry of Limit-Case Universes

This exploratory note identifies a fundamental ontological asymmetry between the fully Aionic (χ = 0) and fully Khaonic (χ → ∞) limit cases of the Zenetist Expression Spectrum. While the current Structural Physics formalism (SP02–SP04) treats these limit cases as symmetric boundary conditions, this note argues that the ontological character of +1 (Theon, Centropy Itself) and -1 (Nekron, Entropy Itself) introduces a structural asymmetry with consequences for the viability, persistence, and even the possibility of fully Khaonic universes. The note examines three interconnected problems. First, the Emanation Problem: whether a fully Khaonic universe can come to be at all without Source-facing generative capacity, given that -1 exists only as the negation of +1 and has no independent ontological content. Second, the Self-Consumption Problem: even granting emergence, a universe operating exclusively through entropic dimensional operators (E₁₀ Malform, E₁₄ Hollow Nest, E₁₅ Collapse Nova) would consume its relative structural endowment without replenishment — potentially constituting the shortest-lived possible universe. Third, the Stabilization Question: whether the entropic hypostatic arc (IL₅ → IL₁) carries sufficient inherent structural scaffolding to prevent immediate self-annihilation. In all cases, Absolute Structure (Structon) remains invariant; what is at stake is the universe's capacity to express the Lattice in sustained form, not the Lattice itself. By contrast, the fully Aionic limit case faces none of these problems: +1 has independent generative content, and its operative dimensional signatures (C₁₀ Formweave, C₁₄ Nested / Recursive, C₁₅ Emergent / Novel) permit indefinite self-sustaining coherence. An addendum examines the prior question of whether a fully Khaonic universe could materialize at all, given that the entropic hypostatic arc (IL₅ → IL₁) must traverse from immaterial structure to corporeal expression without centropic scaffolding. If -1 has no independent generative content, the arc may stall before producing a corporeal realm — resulting not in a universe that consumes itself, but in one that never arrives: a structural stillbirth at the threshold of embodiment. The note connects these observations to Heidegger's "Das Nichts nichtet" (What Is Metaphysics?), mapping the concept onto VOS (Void of Self) rather than zero (Aion), and draws parallels to traditions describing paradisiacal realms as structural descriptions of fully centropic expression. This is an exploratory document. Formal treatment — including derivation of persistence conditions at the limit cases and possible proof of Khaonic structural impossibility — is deferred to a future Structural Physics Extension (SPX) entry.