Capital Protracted War: A Strategic Framework for Individual Investors to Transcend Class

Review Paper · For New Readers · Compiled from zccz14's Original Documents

Abstract

"Capital Protracted War" is an investment strategic framework for individual investors proposed by zccz14 in January 2026. Its core proposition is: Use losses you can afford to bear to pursue a return you "cannot afford" to miss. This framework draws strategic wisdom from Mao Zedong's On Protracted War, combines it with the Anti-Martingale capital management strategy, and proposes a fourth path distinct from the "Individual Inevitable Defeat Theory," the "All-in for Instant Wealth Theory," and the "Steady Development Theory." Through a strategic combination of controllable losses, cumulative advantage, and aggressive pursuit of victory, it aims to achieve exponential growth of personal capital, ultimately allowing investors to "leave the market after victory."

This article systematically reviews the theoretical origins, core propositions, mathematical formalization, conceptual extensions, experimental validation, and latest developments of the Capital Protracted War, based on the original theoretical document (INSIGHTS/6), series of work logs (LOGS/16, 21, 26, 35, 36, 37, 39, 40, 43, 49, 58, 63), and related discussion records, providing a comprehensive introductory overview for new readers.

1. Introduction: Problem Statement and Theoretical Origins

1.1 The Fundamental Dilemma Facing Individual Investors

What is the ultimate goal for an individual investor to survive and thrive in the capital markets? Is it a stable annualized return rate? A low-drawdown equity curve? Or a handsome Sharpe ratio?

zccz14, the proposer of Capital Protracted War, believes these metrics are part of the problem itself. If an investor only focuses on "annualized return," "maximum drawdown," or "Sharpe ratio," they have never defined the endpoint of their investment journey—having achieved the return target this year, what about next year? When can the battle end? When can victory be declared?

Fighting a war where victory can never be defined is destined to be impossible to win.

This insight forms the starting point of Capital Protracted War: individual investors need not a strategy to "stay in the market forever," but a strategy that allows them to "leave the market after victory." The market is a ferry to cross the river; the goal is to reach the other shore, not to drift on the boat forever.

1.2 The Intellectual Source of the Theory

On January 17, 2026, zccz14 gained inspiration while reading Mao Zedong's On Protracted War. The core idea of On Protracted War—under a situation of enemy strength and our weakness, achieving a reversal of the power balance through the three stages of strategic defense, strategic stalemate, and strategic counteroffensive, trading time for space—formed a profound analogy with the situation of individual investors in the capital markets.

Simultaneously, the seed of the "pyramiding with unrealized profits" capital management strategy had germinated years earlier. zccz14 recalled that when hearing stories about futures tycoons years ago, while others marveled at their ability to pick assets and time the market, he had already begun contemplating the potential of "pyramiding with unrealized profits" as a capital management strategy. On January 17, 2026, team member Mage shared a case: someone publicly documented their journey on platform X from $12 to$100,000, with the core technique being All-in with unrealized profits, achieving the goal after 16 consecutive wins.

The key to this case lies not in luck, but in an overlooked market characteristic: volatility clustering—favorable and unfavorable market conditions often appear in clusters. If one can utilize the pyramiding strategy during clusters of favorable conditions, exponential capital growth becomes possible.

1.3 From Inspiration to Theory

Combining the strategic wisdom of On Protracted War with the capital management strategy of pyramiding with unrealized profits, zccz14 completed the core theoretical document (draft) of Capital Protracted War between January 17 and 20, 2026. Subsequently, through multiple rounds of discussion with team members, in-depth dialogue with AI, and continuous experimental validation, the theory was continuously refined and deepened.

Notably, on January 21, zccz14 explicitly stated: abandoning academic packaging, advocating for explaining the theory in plain language. He believed, "This was never meant to be an article for academic publication, but one providing strategic practical guidance. It should be explained in plain language, understandable to everyone." This stance permeated the entire development process of the theoretical system.

2. Core Proposition and Four Principles

2.1 Core Proposition

The core proposition of Capital Protracted War can be summarized in one sentence:

Use losses you can afford to bear to pursue a return you "cannot afford" to miss.

This is not about stable profitability, nor is it about All-in for instant wealth. It is the optimal solution for the risk-reward ratio. Its essence is: under the premise of strictly controlling downside risk, through the mechanism of pyramiding with unrealized profits, transforming limited linear input into exponential capital growth.

The term "Protracted War" can be misleading—it is not a protracted war in the temporal sense (slowly enduring), but a publicly declarable strategy: survive when weak, pursue aggressively when strong, and exit upon victory.

2.2 The Four Principles

Capital Protracted War is built upon four mutually supporting principles:

Principle One: No Reckless Risk (Controllable Losses)

Control the maximum speed of losses to ensure survival capability during weakness. Investors need to prepare a stable cash flow input. This cash flow is not capital for "buying," but ammunition for "covering losses." This controls the loss speed, ensuring one is not wiped out by the market in a single blow. The core concept is "position sizing based on loss tolerance"—hold positions commensurate with the losses you can bear.

Principle Two: No Waste (Cumulative Advantage)

Through systematic trading, avoid emotional decision-making to achieve continuous expansion of advantage. Humanity's greatest weakness in capital management is irrationality: fear in the face of losses, greed in the face of profits. Therefore, the executor of the betting strategy must be a programmatic system; humans should not intervene or even be aware of the specific operations of the betting strategy.

Principle Three: No Delay (Aggressive Pursuit of Victory)

Utilize pyramiding with unrealized profits to increase investment during favorable conditions, achieving leapfrog wealth growth. This is the key distinction between Capital Protracted War and traditional conservative strategies—investing more when making money, rather than sticking to the initial position size. Even if it ultimately fails, the loss is equivalent to the loss before pyramiding, not breaching the cash flow defense line.

Principle Four: No Ambiguity (Clear Objectives)

Define strategic goals and victory conditions clearly before investing. Investors must answer: How much money do I need to make to declare victory? What happens after reaching the goal? Without clear victory criteria, there is no strategy. Capital Protracted War firmly opposes any strategic outcome that "permanently traps the individual in the market."

3. Clarifying Misconceptions: Refuting Three Erroneous Views

To delineate boundaries from existing investment philosophies, Capital Protracted War refutes three mainstream but erroneous views in the market one by one.

3.1 Refuting "Individual Inevitable Defeat Theory" (Cynicism)

View: Individual investors can never beat the market; they are destined to lose money. Reasons include information disadvantage, capital disadvantage, knowledge disadvantage, and fixed costs like transaction fees.

Refutation:

First, the market is a dynamic game system; being harvested and harvesting are symbiotic ecological relationships. If all the harvested disappear, the harvesters also lose their basis for existence. Choosing an ecological niche is key to success for individual investors, not pursuing absolute advantage.

Second, individual investors possess a unique political cost advantage—independence. Any decision involving more than one interest party faces coordination costs and conflicts of interest. Individual investors do not have these problems; they can adjust strategies more flexibly and focus more on their own goals. Specifically, individual investors have relative advantages in adaptability (no taboos), flexibility (no approval needed), and liquidity (free entry and exit).

Finally, cynicism is essentially an ostrich mentality. Can one avoid being harvested by not participating in the market? The world is already "interlinked with iron chains"—most currencies are pegged to the US dollar, which is closely tied to US Treasury bonds, and inflation constantly erodes the wealth of non-investors. Since one cannot escape the world, one can only engage with it.

In the AI era, individual investors can also use AI tools to quickly compensate for their disadvantages, especially in writing trading strategy code—this is already a proven feasible solution.

3.2 Refuting "All-in for Instant Wealth Theory" (Opportunism)

View: Gamble once, turn a bicycle into a motorcycle. Seize a big opportunity, decide win or lose in one go.

Refutation:

The fatal flaw of the All-in for Instant Wealth Theory is uncontrolled risk. It requires investors to place heavy bets without the support of unrealized profits. Once the judgment is wrong, it's catastrophic. Capital Protracted War explicitly stipulates: Heavy bets are only allowed when there are unrealized profits. Unrealized profits represent the market's recognition of the current strategy. Placing heavy bets without unrealized profits often leads to unbearable losses.

Capital Protracted War does not rely on subjective "spotting opportunities," but on the objective rule of "pyramiding with unrealized profits." It does not rely on artistic subjective judgment, but on mechanical objective rules. Below the risk control line lies the realm of uncontrolled risk of opportunism—precisely what Capital Protracted War aims to avoid.

3.3 Refuting "Steady Development Theory" (Dogmatism)

View: Wealth accumulation must rely on time, pursuing stable annualized returns, getting rich slowly.

Refutation:

The problem with the Steady Development Theory is not "steadiness" itself, but that for individual investors, time is insufficient. If the goal is to go from 100,000 to 100 million (1000x), even with an annualized return as high as 100%, it would take 10 years. Moreover, traditional investment philosophy demands a linear growth path, not only fixing the final outcome but also nailing the implementation path to a linear track, greatly limiting the space for strategy selection.

Capital Protracted War and steady growth are not opposites; they can transform into each other. After achieving leapfrog wealth growth, individual investors can transfer part of their capital to steady growth strategies, serving as a base for the next class-transcending campaign. The key is that investors must clearly define whether their current strategic goal is "power generation" or "power consumption" (see Section 5 for details).

4. Mathematical Formalization Framework

Capital Protracted War is not just a set of philosophical ideas; it has a strict mathematical formalization. The following is its core mathematical framework, primarily derived from the original theoretical document and experimental design documents.

4.1 Basic Definitions

Let the time scale $t$ be a discrete variable, representing each moment in the market (can be minute, hour, day, etc., usually corresponding to each K-line bar).

Risk Control Line (RiskLine): Defines the maximum acceptable cumulative loss boundary for the investor at any time $t$.

$$F(t) \ge -C \cdot (t - T_0)$$

Where:

• $F(t)$ is the cumulative profit and loss at time $t$
• $C$ is the cash flow input speed (loss amount bearable per unit time)
• $T_0$ is the start time

The Risk Control Line moves linearly downward over time, indicating that the total cumulative loss the investor can bear increases as cash flow continuously injects.

Victory Condition:

$$F(T_W) \ge A$$

Where $A$ is the preset victory target amount, and $T_W$ is the time when victory is achieved.

4.2 Dual-Account System

The experimental design employs a dual-account system: a benchmark account and a betting account.

Benchmark Account: Always trades with 1 unit of initial position, using no capital management strategy. Its cumulative PnL $\text{BasePnL}(t)$ guides the capital management decisions of the betting account.

Betting Account: Uses the Anti-Martingale capital management strategy, dynamically adjusting position size based on the benchmark account's performance. Its core variables include:

• Unrealized PnL $\text{UnrealizedPnL}(t)$: Floating profit/loss of current holdings
• Realized PnL $\text{RealizedPnL}(t)$: Profit/loss already realized (closed)
• Cumulative PnL $\text{PnL}(t) = \text{UnrealizedPnL}(t) + \text{RealizedPnL}(t)$

4.3 Risk Control Mechanism

Input Cash Flow $C(t)$: Represents the speed of input cash flow (not total amount). The recommended calculation method is to take the maximum "loss/time length" from each trade in the benchmark account as the value of $C(t)$.

Risk Control Line Iteration:

$$\text{RiskLine}(t+1) = \text{RiskLine}(t) - C(t)$$

Initial value is 0, reset to 0 upon taking profit. At any time, ensure $\text{UnrealizedPnL}(t) \ge \text{RiskLine}(t)$.

Venture Capital (VC):

$$\text{VC}(t) = \text{UnrealizedPnL}(t) - \text{RiskLine}(t)$$

Venture Capital is always non-negative, representing the capital currently available for aggressive betting, bearing the risk of complete loss.

4.4 Position Sizing Calculation

Under risk control conditions, bet as aggressively as possible to maximize the utilization efficiency of Venture Capital:

$$\text{Position}(t) = \max\left(1, \left\lfloor \frac{\text{VC}(t)}{\text{StopLoss}(t)} \right\rfloor\right)$$

Where $\text{StopLoss}(t)$ is the benchmark stop-loss amount, calculated from the maximum intra-trade floating loss of each trade in the benchmark account's historical performance.

The meaning of this formula is: Each time a position is opened, do so with the determination that the "maximum loss will directly wipe out the VC," not wasting any portion of the venture capital.

4.5 Taking Profit and Stopping Loss

Take-Profit Event: Triggered when $\text{UnrealizedPnL}(t) \ge M_T$ (target profit-taking amount). After taking profit, reset the state: $$\text{RealizedPnL}(t) \mathrel{+}= M_T, \quad \text{UnrealizedPnL}(t) = 0, \quad \text{RiskLine}(t) = 0$$

Stop-Loss Event: Triggered when the maximum floating loss during the holding period $\ge \text{StopLoss}(t)$. After stopping loss, $\text{VC}(t)$ resets to zero, but the system continues running; no need to reset other states.

4.6 Redefinition of the Objective Function

Traditional investment pursues stable annualized returns. Capital Protracted War redefines the objective function:

Under given input constraints, maximize the probability of reaching the victory line within a certain time window and shorten the time to arrival.

Specifically, the core metric of concern is: Given a target multiple $M_T$, the average time interval between take-profit events. This means investors can expect "approximately how long until the next victory," rather than focusing on some abstract expected return rate.

5. Key Conceptual Extensions

Building upon the core theoretical framework, Capital Protracted War has spawned several important conceptual extensions in subsequent discussions and practices, further enriching the theoretical system.

5.1 "Power Generation" vs. "Power Consumption": Deconstructing Investment Intent

During a business seminar on January 30, 2026, zccz14 proposed an insightful analytical framework—decomposing investment intent into two diametrically opposite types: "power generation" and "power consumption":

The key insight of this framework is: Electricity is homogeneous, and cash flow is also homogeneous. Power generation does not depend on how electricity is used, and power consumption does not depend on the generation method. The two can be designed completely independently, connected only through a cash flow interface.

"Wanting both" is not impossible—if you have a generator (stable return strategy) and appliances (exponential growth strategy), you can certainly consume part of the cash flow to pursue exponential growth. But the key is: Tool design should focus on a single purpose. A strategy that simultaneously pursues generation and consumption will inevitably be indecisive and under-leveraged, achieving neither exponential growth nor stable profitability.

This framework also reveals a deep-seated conflict of interest in the fund industry: Fund managers' interests are tied to assets under management (AUM), leading them to excessively pursue "stable profitability" to attract capital. The result is exponential growth in the manager's scale, but not in the returns of individual investors. Managers and investors are not aligned.

5.2 Leverage and Volatility: Unification of Mathematical Essence

On January 24, 2026, zccz14 supplemented a topic not deeply explored in the original draft—leverage.

The core assertion is: The mathematical essence of volatility and leverage is consistent.

An asset with 1% daily volatility but 10x available leverage is mathematically equivalent to an asset with 10% daily volatility but only 1x leverage. Because the effect of leverage can be linearly converted into the effect of price, which in turn linearly determines the effect of volatility. By Occam's razor, leverage can be reduced to volatility.

Corollary: The victory depicted by Capital Protracted War is easier to achieve in markets with higher volatility.

The market volatility formula corrected for leverage is:

$$\text{Equivalent Volatility} = \text{Market Volatility} \times \text{On-Exchange Leverage Ratio} \times \text{Off-Exchange Leverage Ratio}$$

Traditional fund managers obtain off-exchange leverage by issuing funds (e.g., a 20% performance fee is equivalent to obtaining 20% of risk-free raised capital as free leverage). The way individual investors obtain leverage is precisely the "pyramiding with unrealized profits" strategy in Capital Protracted War—no borrowing, no interest cost, achieving leverage through the market's own volatility and unrealized profits.

5.3 Position Sizing Based on Loss Tolerance: The Basic Concept of Capital Management

"Position sizing based on loss tolerance" is a capital management concept repeatedly emphasized in Capital Protracted War. Its meaning is: Decide the position size based on the losses you can bear, not based on how much you want to earn.

For example: If buying one contract requires $10,000, and your daily cash flow input is$200, then you can accept a 2% daily loss speed. If the actual loss speed exceeds this value, you need to actively exit the market to prevent excessive losses.

This stands in stark contrast to another common investment style: saving money for months and investing it all at once, setting no stop-loss, unwilling to admit defeat when losing, and aggressively adding to positions when winning—this is a completely uncontrolled state.

5.4 Essential Difference from the Martingale Strategy

Capital Protracted War is often misunderstood as a variant of the Martingale strategy, but their logics are completely opposite:

In one sentence: The Martingale strategy is "invest more when losing money"; Capital Protracted War is "invest more when making money."

Clarification needed: The Anti-Martingale strategy itself is not the source of systematic edge. The systematic edge comes from the profitability and market adaptability of the underlying signal strategy. The Anti-Martingale strategy is merely a framework for capital management and risk control, helping investors better utilize the edge of the underlying strategy.

6. Experimental Validation System and Results

Capital Protracted War is not just theoretical; it emphasizes verifiability from the outset. Starting January 31, 2026, the zccz14 team began building a systematic experimental framework and conducted multiple rounds of validation on synthetic and real market data.

6.1 Evolution of the Experimental Framework

Phase One: Initial Experiments (2026-01-31)

Used OpenCode + Opus to write experimental code, open-sourced on the GitHub repository CapitalProtractedWar. Initial experiments were conducted on GBM (Geometric Brownian Motion) synthetic market data.

Phase Two: Paradigm Reconstruction (2026-02-01)

The experimental design underwent a major reconstruction, splitting each experiment into a combination of three independent components:

1. Market Sequence (Object): Objectively existing price sequence, can be generated by models like GBM/GARCH/Heston, or use real historical data.
2. Signal Strategy (Reaction): Response plan to the market sequence, such as mean reversion, trend following, breakout strategies, etc.
3. Betting Strategy (Subject): Capital allocation and risk management method, reflecting the risk preference of the investing subject.

This three-layer structure allows systematic evaluation of the performance of different signal and betting strategies under various market conditions. It also introduced the concept of SMF (Signal-Market Fit)—the fit between the signal strategy and the market sequence determines the benchmark account's performance.

Phase Three: Framework Naming and Engineering (2026-02-04)

The experimental framework was officially named Sand Table, abbreviated SandT/ST, and released as the npm package sandt.

6.2 Synthetic Data Experimental Results

Preliminary experimental conclusions under the GBM high-volatility market model:

A basic mean reversion strategy + Anti-Martingale capital management can still achieve exponential capital growth even in the presence of transaction costs.

An unexpected finding: Trend-following strategies cannot achieve exponential growth under Anti-Martingale capital management, while mean reversion strategies can. This emphasizes the advantage of high-win-rate strategies within the Anti-Martingale framework. However, zccz14 holds reservations about this, believing further validation is needed.

6.3 Real Market Data Validation

BTC Data Validation (2026-02-10)

Testing on recent 20,000 K-lines of real BTC data yielded encouraging results:

• Benchmark signal (dual moving average trend-following strategy) return on BTC 1h data: 18.94%
• Same signal + Anti-Martingale betting strategy return: 9994.17%

The Anti-Martingale betting strategy amplified the benchmark return by approximately 528 times. From the equity curve, one can observe that the Anti-Martingale strategy adds to positions during favorable conditions, reduces positions and stays in the market during unfavorable conditions, exhibiting a step-like pattern of making new highs.

Simultaneously, the experiment also provided counter-evidence: When using a 1024x take-profit parameter ($M_T = 1024$), because the signal strategy could not support such a high profit target, the betting account's net value declined all the way, ending with a return of -39475.30%. This indicates: The quality of the signal strategy itself is crucial; low-quality signals cannot profit even with the Anti-Martingale strategy.

Two key insights:

1. Clustering of favorable conditions indeed exists in real markets.
2. The Anti-Martingale betting strategy can effectively utilize the characteristic of clustered favorable conditions, but only if the signal strategy has sufficient quality.

FMAB Signal Validation (2026-02-11)

The FMAB signal strategy provided by team member Mage performed excellently on ETH:

• Benchmark signal return: 100%
• Return after Anti-Martingale betting: 4,600% ~ 120,000%

In contrast, other benchmark signal strategies (trend following, mean reversion, breakout, etc.) on the same market yielded returns of only 0% ~ 40%. This further validates that "you need a good hammer to strike iron"—the quality of the signal strategy is the decisive factor.

Based on these experimental results, the team began preparing for live trading on February 11, 2026.

7. Extended Reflections and Future Outlook

7.1 The Role of Subjective Trading

Capital Protracted War has a very clear stance on human subjective trading: Subjective trading should only act on the signal strategy; it must never intervene in the betting strategy.

Human subjective trading ability is more reflected in understanding market environments and designing signal strategies, not in capital management and risk control. Humanity's greatest weakness lies precisely in irrational decision-making in capital management—fear in the face of losses, greed in the face of profits. Entrusting the betting strategy entirely to programmatic execution is the only way to avoid emotional issues.

7.2 Conception of Community-Based Trading

Building on this, zccz14 proposed the conception of "community-based trading": having multiple subjective traders act as different signal strategy providers, while a consolidated betting account uniformly executes the Anti-Martingale capital management.

The ingenuity of this design lies in:

• Individual traders can only see the performance of their own signal strategy and the consolidated betting account, unable to establish a strong causal relationship between the two, thus avoiding adjusting the signal strategy based on betting results.
• Due to the nature of the Anti-Martingale strategy, extreme losses from a single signal strategy will not have a devastating impact on the whole.
• The diversity of multiple signal strategies produces an effect similar to collective wisdom.

For profit distribution, 80% of the consolidated betting fund's profits are allocated to capital providers, and 20% to signal strategy designers, seeking a balance between fairness and efficiency.

7.3 Taste and Margin

In reflections on February 6, 2026, zccz14 linked Capital Protracted War to the philosophical concept of "taste": The emphasis on "cash flow input" in Capital Protracted War—controlling loss speed—is essentially creating margin. With margin, one has the qualification to talk about taste; without margin, there is only survival.

And the skeleton of taste is "rejection": Capital Protracted War rejects the escapism of cynicism, the lack of control of opportunism, and the rigidity of dogmatism, choosing a unique path. This act of rejection itself is an embodiment of taste.

7.4 Distinction from Lottery

A common question: What's the difference between Capital Protracted War and buying a lottery ticket?

The answer lies in: Lottery is a fair random probability game, while the market is a game of strategy disguised as a probability game. Investors can improve their "winning probability" by refining their signal strategy, while lottery players can only rely on luck. More importantly, Capital Protracted War does not fix the underlying strategy—each person can have different signal strategies, with sufficient diversity to avoid crowding effects.

7.5 Quantitative Definition of Strategy Failure

zccz14 provided a quantitative definition for strategy failure: When the average time interval $T_S$ between take-profit events exceeds a threshold unacceptable to a human investor (e.g., 3 years), the strategy is considered to have failed. This definition transforms the abstract "whether the strategy is good" into a measurable, comparable specific metric.

8. Summary

Capital Protracted War is a complete investment strategic system, spanning from philosophy to mathematics to engineering. Its core can be condensed into three sentences:

1. Start with cash flow, control loss speed to achieve survival under weakness.
2. Use systematic trading, avoid emotional decisions to achieve continuous expansion of advantage.
3. Utilize pyramiding with unrealized profits, aggressively pursue victory to achieve leapfrog wealth growth—even if it fails, the loss is equivalent to the loss before pyramiding, not breaching the cash flow.

The framework remains constant; the strategies can be changed. The core is to exchange controllable losses for uncertain large returns.

As of February 11, 2026, Capital Protracted War has progressed from theoretical conception to experimental validation and is about to enter the live trading stage. As zccz14 said:

Currently, there is much evidence suggesting that back then, the position management might indeed have been insufficiently scientific.

This statement is both a reflection on the past and an expectation for the future.

9. References

Core Theoretical Documents

1. INSIGHTS/6.md — Capital Protracted War (Draft), first draft 2026-01-17, revised 2026-01-20. The foundational document of Capital Protracted War.

Work Logs (Chronological Order)

2. LOGS/16.md — 2026-01-17, Germination of the pyramiding with unrealized profits strategy, inspiration from reading On Protracted War.
3. LOGS/21.md — 2026-01-21, Theory refinement and discussion, abandoning academic packaging, clarifying fundamental purpose.
4. LOGS/26.md — 2026-01-24, Supplementary discussion on leverage and volatility.
5. LOGS/35.md — 2026-01-30, Reiteration of concepts and discussion, proposing the "generation/consumption" framework, detailed Q&A.
6. LOGS/36.md — 2026-01-31, Open-sourcing experimental code, preliminary experimental conclusions.
7. LOGS/37.md — 2026-02-01, Experimental paradigm reconstruction, three-layer structure design.
8. LOGS/39.md — 2026-02-02, Detailed technical documentation for experimental design.
9. LOGS/40.md — 2026-02-03, AI-assisted experimental breakthrough, proposing SMF and community-based trading concepts.
10. LOGS/43.md — 2026-02-04, Naming the experimental framework Sand Table (sandt).
11. LOGS/49.md — 2026-02-06, Philosophical connection between taste and Capital Protracted War.
12. LOGS/58.md — 2026-02-10, BTC real data validation.
13. LOGS/63.md — 2026-02-11, FMAB signal validation success, preparing for live trading.

Related Cited Documents

14. INSIGHTS/8.md — On the nature of humans, citing the view from Capital Protracted War that "cash flow creates margin."
15. INSIGHTS/9.md — The Three-Body Dynamics Hypothesis of Capital Markets, complementing the Capital Protracted War theory.
16. DEBATES/奇葩说4v4辩论-稳健增长vs跨越阶级.md — AI-generated debate based on Capital Protracted War ideas.

External Resources

17. Open-source experiment repository: https://github.com/zccz14/CapitalProtractedWar
18. Sand Table npm package: sandt