Emes: exist and are unique
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
But an observer can’t establish the inequivalence of emes
Analogy: black holes
Termination in a spacelike singularity : time stops
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 only form of distinction is their different position in the ordinary universe
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
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 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
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 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