The Transformation Proof
It’s not a long complicated beast of logic. But it is definitive in that a proof is also a definition, and this one is about specificity itself. It’s quite simple in exposition, though it is unfamiliar to the way we often think. So the book as a whole tries to provide an inviting environment, where the main consequences are developed with the help of fiction. Sometimes the fiction necessarily gets real.
It’s a proof by contradiction, showing that whenever we assume pure symmetry (the proof defines symmetry) into any form of expression, we are contradicting ourselves. When we speak loosely, this may not always be a big deal. And it’s not always a problem for math or other forms of logic. But the more specific we try to be where symmetry matters, the more the Transformation Proof matters. The more absolutist we are, again, the more the proof kicks in to save us from chaos. And the relativist is provided with a compass connected to nature.
If the proof is correct, error free, it matters because nature is observably asymmetric, and the proof demonstrates that pure symmetry and asymmetry are mutually exclusive; if one exists the other does not. This opens doors to a more productive way of understanding universals, connectivity, and many things connected to that, including, fortunately, a progressive and democratic ethics. The Transformation Proof, when applied, can feed the hungry. I hope this works, but the way I arrived at it is by hoping mostly for the truth and that the truth might actually be liberating.
The thing about giving up on “the truth” (a postmodern retreat) is that it’s not just a matter of discovery or “the quest”; it’s about whether we are going to keep asking questions. The power of doubt. Not finding the truth is not the problem. It is even a good thing that we aren’t always right. The disaster is not caring anymore about what might in fact be true.
River of Asymmetry 
Trackbacks & Pingbacks