#### Emes: exist and are unique

Emes: exist and are unique

#### The ruliad in its rawest state trees out everything

The ruliad in its rawest state trees out everything

But there are equivalences that make it nontrivial

Most of the equivalencing is done at the observer level

#### An observer can equivalence emes for their own purposes

An observer can equivalence emes for their own purposes

But an observer can’t establish the inequivalence of emes

### Analogy: black holes

Analogy: black holes

Termination in a spacelike singularity : time stops

#### Hierarchy of time

Hierarchy of time

Black hole time : time is finite (equivalent to finite set of numbers)

Our usual time : a TM works the way it usually does (i.e. its equivalent to countable numbers)

Level 1 hyperruliad : infinitely compresses time for a TM [ time is somewhere in the transfinite hierarchy ]

#### The emes in a black hole ? can’t determine that they are distinct from the emes in another black hole

The emes in a black hole ? can’t determine that they are distinct from the emes in another black hole

The only form of distinction is their different position in the ordinary universe

### Can the universe (AKA the ruliad) prove its existence & uniqueness?

Can the universe (AKA the ruliad) prove its existence & uniqueness?

Can it prove its completeness and consistency?

Can it prove its connectedness?

#### Inside arithmetic, you just assume completeness & consistency

Inside arithmetic, you just assume completeness & consistency

### Default case (assuming emes are unique): everything gets treed out

Default case (assuming emes are unique): everything gets treed out

Observers do “trivial” or nontrivial equivalencing

### If all the emes were nonunique, then there is no possibility for existence in the universe

If all the emes were nonunique, then there is no possibility for existence in the universe

#### If things could never be distinct, there could be no ruliad, and there could be no existence in general.

If things could never be distinct, there could be no ruliad, and there could be no existence in general.

The possibility for distinctness depends on the infinite hierarchy of hyperruliads

### The noncollapse of the ruliad is a shadow of the tower of hyperruliads

The noncollapse of the ruliad is a shadow of the tower of hyperruliads

### If we were in fact in the hyperruliad would we know it?

If we were in fact in the hyperruliad would we know it?

Observers like us believe we persist in time, and we have a decent amount of time for which we persist...

#### Hypertime observers...

Hypertime observers...

Hypertime observer has disdain for the pure time observers in our universe

Imagine the level of science if you can solve every halting problem: i.e. there is no computational irreduciblity