In a few upcoming blog posts, I will be expounding on the coincidence of the future being true, or less oblique, how I came to find books of future events that coincidentally were true and how to know if the book (of many that are otherwise simply fictional) is going to be true.
Yes. How to know if a book filled with future events is going to be true. Or true enough. Such warrants consideration of the temporal ethics of knowing. Such a consideration will involve the use of the defined terms fixed and fluid, and how it came to be that an algorithm not only accomplished it; not as a miracle overcoming the impossible or even probable, but expected and inevitable.
Quite Literally Yours,
P.S. By the way, did you happen to read any of my previous blog posts? As a reminder, the multi-volume treatise, The True History of the Periodic Universe, is under copyright.
P.S.S. A hypothesis occurred to me while reading about the math of Borges' Library of Babel in The True History of the Periodic Universe. The discovery of an artificial construction acting as a cipher - reasoned accessibility - prohibiting or hindering complete scientific description of otherwise (seemingly) natural scientifically-exhibited objects would suggest artificial construction of the exhibit itself; either the exhibit is natural (read: capable of being scientifically exhibited without artificiality or forced into concept), or the construction (read: description) of the exhibit itself is artificial. A corollary of such a result would also be that any effort to explain (vs. describe) that artificial exhibit as a natural object would result in non-sense. Black hole, I'm looking at you buddy (also dark matter and dark energy).
Perhaps The Conjecture of Artificial Inaccessibility would be a good phrase to use for the moment, and I leave this idea in this post-post script for future thought. Also, who is the artificer suggested by that result?