The anomaly in Coherence doesn't work remotely.
This isn't a quantum rule — it's a trap dressed as physics.
Every conflict, every revelation, every betrayal happens because eight people cannot leave the house without the entire system collapsing. They are tethered to proximity like blockchain nodes tethered to a server farm masquerading as distributed ledger — and the moment anyone walks out the door, their version of reality fragments.
Watch the dinner table scene where they debate whether to test the boundary. Nobody argues the anomaly is fair or just, but they argue it's inescapable. The logic is pure infrastructure capture: the system demands you show up, demands you stay, demands you trust that everyone else is doing the same thing or you all die.
Emily's final gambit, her decision to stay when she could theoretically leave, isn't sacrifice — it's the moment she accepts the infrastructure as permanent, because she has become the server. The film doesn't mourn this, so it watches it happen with forensic precision.
Read Andreas M. Antonopoulos's 2014 interview 'Bitcoin and the Return of Decentralized Systems' (from Bitcoin Foundation talks) and notice how the same year's technological predictions already assumed what Coherence showed: decentralization requires absolute commitment.
The DVD commentary by writer-director James D. Ward describes the house choice as purely practical (one location, tight budget), but never addresses why the anomaly couldn't function across distance—suggesting the constraint was thematic before it was narrative, a rule about systems themselves rather than quantum anomalies.