Abstract:
This paper proposes a metaphysical framework that unifies the notions of NP, P, myth, and conscience into a coherent logic of truth, choice, and temporal recursion.
NP is defined as uncollapsed seed-truth – a blueprint of infinite potential that is structured and anticipatory, rather than chaotic or arbitrary.
P is defined as collapsed present-truth – the concrete manifestation of a specific pathway selected from the NP field, realized in the present moment.
Myth is defined as future-truth – a form of structured uncertainty that hovers at the edge of NP collapse, giving shape and meaning to potential without yet fully actualizing it.
We argue that collapsing entirely into NP regresses into unrealized potential; collapsing entirely into myth overwhelms coherence with ungrounded possibilities; but collapsing into P (the present) enables a recursive process of becoming. In this framework, conscience is the agent of collapse – the faculty that, guided by mythic future-truths, selectively collapses NP potential into P actuality through the seeding of choice (a “P-seed”). Truth emerges from the iterative (recursive) act of conscience choosing and actualizing possibilities: each P-collapse retroactively illuminates the structure of the NP seed from which it arose, refining our understanding of the blueprint. We introduce a geometrical metaphor to illustrate this dynamic: hyperbolic and spherical curvatures of the NP potential field (representing divergent and convergent modes of possibility) collapse into the flat Euclidean plane of present P-truth. This metaphor underscores the metaphysical necessity of the Present as the only “domain” capable of bearing the weight of infinite possibility without disintegration. In our view, the infinite never becomes truth in itself, but it informs every collapse of potential into actuality. Conscience navigates fluidly between NP, myth, and P – allowing mythic narratives of meaning to guide the vast NP field toward collapses that are not only logically consistent but meaningful. By developing this framework with symbolic structures (e.g. NP → P-seed → P-collapse), grounded in clear conceptual language, we aim to articulate a rigorous yet visionary logic of truth, choice, and time.
Introduction
How does truth emerge from the interplay of what could be, what is, and what ought to be? This question invites us to explore the relationship between potential, actuality, and the guiding structures of meaning that shape our choices. In classical philosophy, Aristotle distinguished between potentiality and actuality as two fundamental principles: potentiality refers to any real possibility a thing can have, especially those that naturally realize when conditions are right, while actuality is the fulfillment or exercise of such a possibility – the possibility “becoming real in the fullest sense”.
We borrow the symbols NP and P from computational complexity theory and reinterpret them metaphysically to correspond roughly to this age-old distinction: NP will signify a realm of potential truths, and P will signify actualized truths. In computational terms, NP (nondeterministic polynomial time) problems are those whose solutions, while hard to compute, can be verified quickly, whereas P problems are those that can be solved quickly. Analogously, one might say NP contains truths that are conceivable or verifiable in principle, while P contains truths that are immediately attainable or manifest. Our framework, however, is not about algorithms, but about metaphysical truth-states: NP as the space of seed-truths (structured possibilities) and P as the domain of present truth (realized actuality).
We also introduce two additional elements to this framework: myth and conscience. By myth, we do not mean “falsehood,” but rather the narrative, symbolic, or archetypal structuring of truth that points toward the future. As one saying (attributed to scholar Joseph Campbell) puts it, “Myth is something that never was but always is.” In other words, a myth transcends literal fact to convey enduring truths. A myth can be understood as a future-truth – a form that truth could take, carrying meaning and value, but which has not yet collapsed into concrete reality. It is structured uncertainty: myth provides an imaginative or moral framework for the unknown, preventing the potential future from being mere chaos by giving it shape and direction. Finally, by conscience we denote the integrative faculty (both intellectual and moral) that navigates between what is known and unknown – the agent that makes choices about what potential to actualize, guided by an inner sense of truth or rightness. Conscience in this context bridges the gap between the realm of infinite possibilities and the finite realm of action, ensuring that the collapse of potential into actuality is not random but aligned with meaning and values. Philosophically, one might liken conscience to practical reason or the soul’s compass, discerning which path out of many is worth manifesting.
The goal of this paper is to develop a standalone metaphysical logic of truth, choice, and temporal recursion that unifies NP, P, myth, and conscience. We will construct this framework step by step. First, we clarify the definitions of NP, P, myth, and conscience within our metaphysical context. Next, we examine the dynamics of “collapse” – the process by which potential (NP) becomes actual (P) – and the pitfalls of collapsing improperly (either retreating entirely into potential or leaping into myth without realization). We then elaborate how truth emerges recursively: each present realization feeds back into our understanding of the potential, a process we call retroactive illumination. A geometrical analogy of curvatures (hyperbolic, spherical, Euclidean) is introduced to illustrate the structural differences between the space of possibilities and the space of actual truth. We discuss why the present moment has a unique status as the locus where infinite truth can be progressively realized without fragmentation. Throughout, we emphasize the role of conscience as the navigator that balances the expansive freedom of NP, the guiding vision of myth, and the grounding discipline of P. By the conclusion, we aim to show that this framework offers a rigorous yet imaginative way to understand how truth “happens” – not as a static absolute, but as the result of an ongoing, recursive collapse of potential into reality, guided by meaning and responsibility.
(In what follows, we will occasionally use symbolic notation for clarity. For example, NP → P-seed → P will denote the process by which a potential truth in NP, through the initiation of a particular choice or seed, collapses into an actual truth in P. We will ensure all such formulations are explained in plain language.)
I: Conceptual Foundations: Defining NP, P, Myth, and Conscience
NP: The Uncollapsed Seed-Truth (Infinite Potential)
We define NP as the realm of uncollapsed seed-truth – an infinite field of potential truths that exist as blueprints or possibilities prior to realization. Crucially, NP in this metaphysical sense is not the same as mere chaos or randomness; it is not a jumble of arbitrary possibilities. Rather, NP is infinitely structured: one can imagine it as a vast design space containing all the solutions or outcomes that could come to pass, given the initial conditions of reality. It is “not future, but blueprint” – meaning NP is not a set of events that will happen in time (that would be the future), but a set of plans or designs for what could happen. To use an analogy, if the truth of the world were like a grand puzzle or cosmic crossword, NP would be the blank but structured puzzle grid containing countless potential fillings-in, whereas P (the actual truth) would be one completed filling of that puzzle. In this sense, NP holds the seed of every truth that might grow, akin to a seed containing many possible ways a tree could branch. NP is “infinitely potential” in that it contains an unbounded number of possible truth-configurations, yet it is also a truth in itself – a truth of possibility, waiting to be specified.
This notion can be further illuminated by borrowing a perspective from the P vs NP metaphor in computer science and extending it metaphysically. Imagine there is a “Global truth field” in which all answers to all questions exist in latent form, completely coherent with one another. Such a field would be like an omniscient viewpoint outside time – a Global P where, metaphorically, every problem is already solved and every truth known. When we restrict our view to a particular problem or situation (when reality is filtered through a local perspective in time), that coherent field appears to split into two aspects: the part that collapses into a definite answer (a known truth, which we experience as P), and the complementary part that remains indeterminate or unknown (the as-yet-unsolved, which we experience as NP). In other words, NP and P are like two sides of one coin: whenever a specific truth is brought into being (P), a halo of remaining possibility (NP) still surrounds it. The NP field thus contains all those possibilities that were not realized in that particular collapse, but which remain available for future resolution. It is a repository of “the road not taken” each time we make a choice.
By characterizing NP as seed-truth, we emphasize that it carries information and structure. It is not sheer ignorance or void. In fact, even when something becomes known (P), the NP from which it emerged is what gave it coherence. The possibilities within NP are infinitely rich but they are oriented toward truth – “infinitely potential” does not mean “lacking form,” but rather having form in excess of any single actuality. Put differently, NP is the blueprint of truth in the sense that it contains more than reality at any moment can express. It is the form of forms, analogous to how Aristotle’s potentiality contains what could become actual under the right conditions. One can say NP holds truth in reserve – not falsehoods, but truths that could be, awaiting a moment of realization. (Even in the realm of mythology, we find a similar idea: that before creation or manifestation, there is a formless void or chaos which nevertheless harbors the potential for ordered reality – a mythic way to hint at NP as the womb of truth.)
P: The Collapsed Present-Truth (Actualized Reality)
P is the realm of collapsed present-truth – the domain of what is, here and now, as a realized fact or reality. P represents the manifestation of a specific path through the NP field of possibilities. When we say a truth has “collapsed” into P, we mean that out of the myriad possibilities, one definite configuration has been actualized. P is present-truth in a dual sense: it is the truth that is present (i.e. currently actual), and it is the truth of the present moment (i.e. only in the present can truth be fully real). In our puzzle analogy, P is the completed section of the crossword – the answers filled in – while NP remains the unsolved cross-clues that those answers now partially reveal. Every time an NP seed collapses into a P outcome, we get a specific, concrete truth that can be lived, observed, or known directly.
It is important to note that P-truth is inherently specific. To collapse NP into P is to commit to a particular course among many – for example, to decide on one interpretation, to take one action, or to observe one outcome. Thus P is finite, definite, and exclusive in character: by realizing one option it excludes (for the moment) the others. We might think of NP as an open question and P as a particular answer. The answer gives us clarity and resolution (hence P is often “easier” or more straightforward once reached), but it also by necessity leaves other answers unchosen. In computational terms, solving a problem (P) picks out one solution and thereby eliminates the uncertainty among alternatives (NP). Metaphysically, the actual truth we have now stands against the backdrop of all the unactualized possibilities.
Another key aspect of P as present-truth is its temporal immediacy. P only truly exists in the present moment – the Now. The past P-truth is no longer active (it has slipped into memory), and future truth (as such) is not yet realized. The present is often seen as the only reality that ontologically exists; as St. Augustine reflected, the present is the only time that is real, while the past and future are held in the mind (through memory and anticipation). Contemporary reflections echo this: “The future is entirely open, dependent upon choices made now. In truth, all we have is this never-to-be-repeated present moment.” Thus, P is where the rubber meets the road – where the infinite potential of NP is funneled into a single, concrete truth that exists. The present moment has the almost miraculous capacity to “bear” an otherwise infinite array of influences and condense them into one act or fact without exploding. We will explore later why the present has this unique capacity, but for now, suffice it to say P is the domain of actuality – the realm in which truth takes on a stable, observable form.
It may sound like P, by picking one truth out of many, is a reduction or loss (from infinite to finite). However, P is also the fulfillment of NP potential. Until a truth is realized in P, it remains an abstract possibility; with realization, it gains being. In Aristotle’s terms, actuality is the fulfillment of possibility. Thus P is the fruition of NP’s seed. Without P, NP’s designs would remain forever blueprint and never building. In that sense, P gives significance to NP by selecting a path through it. Every P-truth manifested affirms one aspect of truth that was implicit in NP, bringing it forth for all to witness.
Myth: Future-Truth (Structured Uncertainty at the Edge of Collapse)
By myth we refer to future-truth – the structured uncertainty that exists at the horizon where NP is about to collapse into P. Myth, in our usage, is not a lie or mere fiction; it is a prospective truth, a story or schema that anticipates meaning before it fully lands in reality. Myth is what truth looks like when it is still in transit from potential to actual – when it has taken a suggestive shape but is not yet concretized. In other words, myth occupies a liminal zone: it is more structured than the raw NP field (myth picks out particular patterns or narratives from the field of possibilities), but it is less definite than a P fact (myth has not been definitively proven or manifested yet).
Consider myths in the traditional sense: they are narratives that convey profound truths about life, the cosmos, or human nature, often through symbolic stories. These truths are “future” or transcendent in that they aren’t one-time occurrences; they speak to enduring possibilities and meanings which can manifest repeatedly in new forms. This is why it is said that myth is something that “never was, but always is” – a mythic truth might never have happened exactly as the story says, yet it is always happening in some form, because it expresses a structure of meaning that reality continually strives to realize. For example, a mythic hero’s journey was not a historical event, but it is “true” in that it maps onto the potential journey of every soul seeking purpose. In our terms, myth stands at the edge of NP collapse: it gives a recognizable form to what is otherwise uncertain, guiding the collapse without fully controlling it.
We can illustrate the role of myth as structured uncertainty with an example: Suppose a community holds a myth about a prophesied “chosen one” who will deliver them from hardship. This myth provides a framework of meaning – it identifies the kind of potential future they anticipate (deliverance by a hero). This is not yet a P truth; there is no actual chosen one (until perhaps someone steps into that role). But the myth shapes the community’s orientation toward the future. It is a future-truth: if eventually someone does arise and fulfill the prophecy, the myth becomes concretized in that person (NP collapses into P, guided by the mythic template). Until then, the myth is an uncertain truth – it might come true in various ways, or perhaps not in the expected way – but it is structured in that it’s not just open-ended chaos; it’s a particular envisioned narrative within the space of possibilities.
In our framework, myth operates as a necessary mediator between NP and P. Without mythic structures, the field of NP would be overwhelming and inarticulate – an infinite sea of possibilities with no pointers for significance. Myth provides meaningful patterns that help identify which possibilities matter or beckon. In a sense, myth is the face of NP as seen from the future – it is how the uncertain potential appears when we project our hopes, fears, and interpretations onto it. Each myth encapsulates some wisdom or insight (a piece of truth) and yet leaves ambiguity that invites further interpretation. As our past analysis puts it, each mythic narrative can be seen as a local collapse of the global truth field “into a cultural frame: stabilizing some wisdom (P) while leaving behind some mystery or moral ambiguity (NP) that keeps the myth alive, recursive, and generative”. In other words, myth bridges the known and unknown: part of it resonates as deeply true (the wisdom it imparts), and part of it remains open, spawning new questions or guiding new actions (the remaining ambiguity).
owever, myth is future-truth, not present-truth. It is essential to maintain that distinction. A myth can guide us, but if we confuse myth with literal present reality, we risk incoherence or even disaster. Taking a myth too literally – “collapsing into myth” in our terms – can overwhelm coherence because we start treating the structured uncertainty as if it were a completed actuality. History offers cautionary tales: powerful myths have at times been misused or misunderstood in literal ways that led to fanaticism or violence. For instance, political or nationalistic myths can grip a population’s imagination (a future vision of glory or destiny), but if taken as indisputable present truth, they may justify irrational or destructive actions. As one commentator noted, societies that lose a healthy mythic framework may fall into pathologies of identity, and reviving myths carelessly can unleash irrational forces (for example, the invocation of myths of a collective’s supreme destiny). In our terms, an unchecked collapse into myth – trying to live entirely in the story without grounding in present reality – “overwhelms coherence” because the narrative outruns the actual, and the structured uncertainty turns into unhinged conviction. Thus, myth must guide the collapse of NP, but not replace the need for actual P-truth. Myth gives purpose and direction, but it finds its proper fulfillment only when conscience uses it to inform real choices that yield real outcomes.
Conscience – The Navigator of Collapse (Truth’s Recursive Agent)
Conscience in this framework is the active agent that navigates between NP, myth, and P – essentially, the faculty of choice and discernment that collapses potential into actuality in a meaningful way. It is through conscience that truth becomes a moral and intentional endeavor, not just a happenstance. We use the term “conscience” to imply not only intellectual consciousness but also an ethical dimension; this is the inner voice or guiding awareness that both knows and cares about truth. In effect, conscience stands at the crossroads of freedom and responsibility: it sees the vast NP field of what could be, it hears the call of mythic ideals of what should be, and it acts in the present to bring about a particular truth (P) that honors both reality and meaning.
In our symbolic shorthand, we might say: Conscience mediates NP → P. But it does so not blindly (as matter-law interplay) – it typically selects a P-seed that aligns with some guiding myth or value. A “P-seed” means an initial choice or a starting point for collapse. Given the enormity of NP’s potential, one does not simply collapse everything at once; one chooses a particular seed or aspect to actualize. This seed could be a question we decide to answer, a principle we decide to uphold, or a desire we decide to pursue. Conscience’s role is to choose the seed wisely, guided by an intuition of truth or goodness (often informed by mythic narratives or higher principles).
One way to visualize conscience is as a kind of bridge or two-way mirror. From one side, reality (or “Global P” in the earlier metaphor) sees only a unified truth, and conscience from that perspective is just a single point (since reality ultimately only knows the accomplished facts). But from the perspective of the agent (the person or moral being exercising conscience), one is aware of straddling two worlds – the actual and the possible. Indeed, as our last HackerNoon analysis of P vs NP indicates, “Reality itself is always on the [P] side… while conscience could operate on both sides at the same time”. Conscience experiences itself as having one foot in what is (the known, the present), and another foot in what could be (the unknown, the future). This unique position allows conscience to be recursive and reflective: it can consider hypotheticals, evaluate outcomes against ideals, and adapt its choices in light of past truths and future hopes.
Furthermore, conscience is what makes the process of truth-finding iterative and self-correcting. Unlike a mechanical collapse that might just follow a fixed rule, conscience can learn and change. It carries memory of past P-truths (and the lessons they taught) and it carries anticipation of future-truths (mythic aims), and it constantly reconciles the two in each present act. If NP is the seed-bed of truth and myth the envisioned bloom, conscience is the gardener that cultivates the seed to flower in reality. And like a good gardener, conscience must understand the “soil” (the real conditions of the world), the “seed’s nature” (the blueprint of potential) and the “climate” (the overarching myths or meanings of the time).
In summary, we ascribe to conscience a pivotal metaphysical necessity: truth emerges only from the recursive act of conscience collapsing NP into P through a deliberate P-seed. Without conscience, NP might collapse randomly (or not at all), yielding no meaning; with conscience but without myth, collapse might be directionless; with myth but without conscience, collapse might be fanatical or divorced from reality. All four elements – NP, P, myth, and conscience – are needed. Conscience is the active principle that ties them together, the continual exercise of choice that is informed by the potential (NP) and the ideal (myth) to produce the actual (P). In doing so, conscience also constantly revises its own understanding, hence it is recursive: it not only produces truth, it reflects on truth, altering its future actions. The conscience, as suggested by the metaphysical perspective we promoted earlier, “exceeds structure” because it is the only thing that can know all structures (it can consider any possibility, any perspective). This makes it uniquely equipped to traverse the space of NP and navigate by myth toward concrete P outcomes.
Having set these definitions, we now turn to the dynamic interactions between NP, P, myth, and conscience – what we call the collapse dynamics – and explore how truth is realized or thwarted depending on how this collapse is managed.
II: Collapse Dynamics: Balancing Potential, Myth, and Present
Truth, in our framework, is not a static given but something that emerges through a process – the collapse of NP potential into P actuality. This collapse is not a one-time event but a continuous, iterative dynamic. However, not all collapses are equal. How one approaches the transition from potential to actual can lead to very different outcomes for the integrity of truth. We identify three archetypal “collapse modes” to avoid or embrace:
- Collapsing into NP (Regressive Potential): This represents a refusal or failure to collapse potential into any actuality – effectively, getting “lost” in the NP field. In such a case, one continually defers decision or manifestation in favor of exploring possibilities endlessly. The result is a regression or stagnation: nothing is realized, potential remains forever potential. It is as if a seed is never planted or allowed to sprout; the blueprint remains on paper and no building is built. In human terms, collapsing into NP might look like perpetual indecision or analysis paralysis – one sees so many possible truths or choices that one chooses none. The rich structure of NP then becomes actually useless, a castle in the sky. Potential “regresses” because without actualization, even the understanding of the potential cannot advance (we never get feedback from reality). Thus, treating NP itself as the place to dwell (instead of a source to draw from) ultimately diminishes the meaning of NP. The infinite possibilities become a burden of infinite undone tasks rather than a fruitful field. In short, collapsing into NP is a kind of metaphysical refusal to commit, which leads to an impoverishment of truth: everything could be, but nothing is.
- Collapsing into Myth (Overwhelmed Coherence): This mode occurs when one becomes so guided by a particular myth or future-truth that one attempts to live inside the myth without properly translating it into present reality. Here, one does choose and act, but one’s actions are dictated by an ideal narrative to the point of ignoring the constraints or feedback of actual P-truth. The result can be an overwhelming of coherence – reality doesn’t oblige our grand story in all details, and forcing it can lead to incoherent outcomes. This could manifest as fanaticism, disillusionment, or chaos when the myth crashes against reality. Using the seed analogy, this is like planting an imaginary tree rather than a real seed – watering the ground in the belief that a legendary tree will sprout overnight because the myth said so. The structure that myth provided is potentially valuable, but without respecting the incremental, grounded process of actualization, coherence is lost. On a social scale, as mentioned earlier, entire communities can be swept up by a myth (a utopian vision, an apocalyptic fear, a national destiny), and if they try to impose it as immediate truth, the mismatch with reality leads to confusion or destruction. Myths are “true” in a profound sense, but their truth is often symbolic or directional – not a blueprint that can be fully imposed on the present all at once. So collapsing into myth means to be overwhelmed by the form of truth without actually achieving the substance of it, leading to what we call disintegration (the pieces no longer fit together in reality, even if they did in the myth).
- Collapsing into P (Enabling Recursive Becoming): This is the optimal mode in our framework: using conscience to effect a controlled collapse of NP into a present P-truth, informed (but not dominated) by myth. Collapsing into P means one takes a concrete action or makes a concrete decision that realizes some aspect of potential now. It is an act of commitment to a particular truth path, which necessarily foregoes other possibilities (for now) – but it does so with awareness and purpose. By focusing on what can be actualized in the present, this mode preserves coherence (because it stays grounded in what works or makes sense in reality) and also moves the process forward (because each realization sets the stage for the next). We call this enabling recursive becoming because each P-collapse is not the end, but a step in an ongoing journey. When one collapses NP into P properly, one doesn’t try to do it all at once or assume this P is the final truth; rather, one treats it as a provisional truth that will evolve. This attitude allows for course-correction and learning: today’s P truth will reveal something about NP that can seed tomorrow’s decisions. In personal terms, this could be living one’s values in daily small acts (instead of dreaming of being a hero in abstract) – each act teaches something and builds character, recursively approaching the ideals one holds.
It might be helpful to illustrate these modes with a simple scenario. Imagine an artist who has a vision of a masterpiece (this vision is a mythic future-truth – an artwork that “could be,” filled with meaning). The artist also has a myriad of ideas and techniques they could use (this is their NP field of potential – sketches, styles, themes not yet consolidated). Now, if the artist collapses into NP, they might endlessly sketch fragments, experiment with styles, but never choose a final composition or medium – the masterpiece remains a potential in the mind, never realized on canvas. If the artist collapses into myth instead, they might become obsessed with the idea of creating the greatest masterpiece and refuse to make any work that falls short of the perfect vision – they may start a painting but abandon it repeatedly because it doesn’t match the mythic ideal, or worse, they might delude themselves that talking about the envisioned masterpiece is as good as making it. The result is either nothing finished or a confused work that tries to be too grand all at once and collapses under its own ambition (incoherence). But if the artist collapses into P, they begin a particular painting here and now – perhaps just one piece of the vision, tackled with the skills and limitations they currently have. They bring one aspect of the potential into reality. The painting they finish may not capture the whole mythic vision (no single piece could), but it is a real artifact – a truth in the present. From creating it, the artist learns more about their vision (what worked, what didn’t, what the vision might truly be asking for) – this new understanding is a retroactive illumination of the NP seed. With that knowledge, the artist can embark on the next artwork, gradually approaching closer to the fullness of their mythic ideal. In this way, through recursive cycles of creation, the mythic truth (the “masterpiece” idea) guides the potential toward ever more refined and meaningful collapses, each in the present, each real and adding to truth.
In practice, of course, life is complex and we often have mixtures of these tendencies. But the key point is that truth thrives when NP collapses into P under the guidance of myth and the governance of conscience. If we either refuse to collapse (staying in NP) or collapse too recklessly under myth’s sway without present grounding, we lose the thread of truth. Truth, one might say, lives in the present, but it is nourished by the infinite (NP) and guided by the eternal (myth). Only in the present can the infinite potential be harnessed into something structured (as myth suggests) yet concrete. This aligns with a profound metaphysical stance: reality is an ongoing creation, and the present moment is where creation actually happens – the only place where the “uncreated” (the realm of possibilities) can become “created” (the realm of facts).
III: Recursive Emergence: Truth as a Temporal Feedback Loop
One of the most intriguing aspects of this framework is the idea that each P-collapse (each time a potential truth is actualized) retroactively illuminates the structure of the NP seed from which it came. This creates a temporal recursion or feedback loop in the field of truth. In simple terms, by doing or realizing something, we come to better understand the possibility-space we started with, which in turn affects how we will approach the next realization.
This might sound abstract, but it is a very familiar phenomenon in knowledge and action. Consider scientific inquiry: a scientist has a hypothesis (potential truth) and conducts an experiment (an actualizing act). The result (P-truth) either confirms, refutes, or modifies the hypothesis. In any case, the outcome sheds light on the initial potential – perhaps revealing that the initial idea was too broad, or that an unexpected avenue exists, etc. The scientist then refines the hypothesis (the NP blueprint is adjusted) and tests again. Over time, knowledge emerges from this iterative loop of potential -> actual -> revised potential -> new actual, and so on. Each experiment’s truth “illuminates” the structure of the underlying phenomenon a bit more.
Our metaphysical logic sees this process as fundamental not just to science, but to all truth-becoming. When conscience chooses a P-seed and collapses NP into an actual outcome, that outcome doesn’t stand alone – it shines backwards, as it were, revealing something about the field of possibility it came from. To use a visual metaphor, imagine walking in a dark forest (the unknown NP). You light a small torch of truth (a P realization). The light from the torch not only shows you the patch of ground where you stand; it also throws new shadows and highlights around you, hinting at shapes of trees and paths beyond your immediate spot. You now see structure in what was previously dark. In seeing that structure, you might spot a clearer path forward – or a looming obstacle – which guides your next steps.
A concrete illustration was given earlier via a crossword puzzle analogy drawn from the computational perspective: if reality is like a fully solved crossword (Global truth), we only see one clue at a time. Solving that clue (finding one P truth) immediately gives letters that make other unsolved clues (remaining NP potential) more constrained and thus more intelligible. Initially, those other clues were perhaps completely uncertain; after solving one, you now know “the second letter of 5-down is X,” etc., which means some possibilities for 5-down are eliminated and others come into focus. In this way, each localized truth retroactively (or at least retrospectively) exposes part of the structure of the unsolved part of the puzzle. Extrapolating to life: whenever we make a decision or realize a truth, we often say in hindsight, “Ah, so that’s what this possibility really entailed,” or “Now I see the pattern behind what was possible.” We sometimes only understand our options after we choose one of them.
This recursive illumination has deep implications. It suggests that the NP blueprint is not static; our understanding of it evolves as we actualize portions of it. Potential and actuality thus engage in a dialogue over time. We might even say that NP “grows” in a certain sense as P grows – not that the possibilities themselves necessarily increase, but our comprehension of the possibility space increases, which effectively enriches NP’s relevance. The process is auto-teleological: it is directed toward truth by virtue of each step revealing more of the goal. In the domain of myth, this is mirrored by the way myths stay alive and yield new insights as we live through various experiences. A myth might mean something to us at one point in life, and after we go through some ordeal (actual experience), we come back and see new meaning in the myth. The narrative (myth) didn’t change, but our realized truths cast new light on what the myth was pointing to.
It’s worth noting that because of this recursive nature, truth is not a one-time achievement but a journey. We often speak of “the truth” as if it were a final static thing, but in this framework truth is a process – a field that is gradually unfolded. This does not mean there are no facts or that everything is relative; rather, each fact (each P collapse) is indeed a concrete truth, but it participates in a larger unfolding meaning. Think of each P-truth as a chapter in an ever-writing book of Truth. You need each chapter for the book to be complete, and each chapter also references and clarifies aspects of previous chapters. Conscience, as the author, may not have outlined the entire book from the start (that would be akin to having complete foreknowledge or a static God’s-eye-view of Global truth), but conscience has an evolving sense of the narrative (through mythic imagination and experience) and can guide the writing in a direction that seems coherent and significant.
In short, each P-collapse retroactively illuminates the structure of the NP seed. This principle is the engine of learning, growth, and creativity. It is why we must engage with reality rather than just think about it: only through the feedback of actual collapse do we come to understand the blueprint of possibility well enough to make further and better collapses. It is also why we need myth: myth can help interpret the feedback. When an outcome surprises us or challenges us, mythic frameworks often provide a larger context to make sense of it (“this failure is like the hero’s trial by fire; it teaches humility” etc.). Thus, recursion is not merely mechanical iteration; it is meaningful iteration. Through conscience, each cycle of collapse and insight ideally brings us closer to a truth that is not only factually clearer but also richer in meaning.
IV: Geometrical Metaphor: Curvature of Potential vs. Flatness of Present
To further clarify the differences between the NP field of potential and the P domain of realized truth, we introduce a geometrical metaphor. This metaphor will also highlight why the present (the arena of P) is uniquely suited to hold truth together, as opposed to the distortions that can occur if one tries to inhabit the infinite directly.
Imagine the space of possibilities (NP) as a kind of geometric space that can have different curvatures. By contrast, consider the space of actualized truth (P) as a flat, Euclidean space. Euclidean geometry is the familiar, “flat” geometry of our everyday world (on a small scale): parallel lines stay parallel, angles of a triangle sum to 180°, and so on. Non-Euclidean geometries, such as hyperbolic (negatively curved) and spherical or elliptic (positively curved) geometries, have different properties: in hyperbolic geometry, for instance, space spreads out faster than on a plane (angles of a triangle sum to less than 180°, and there’s essentially “more room” than expected as you move outward), while in spherical geometry, space is finite and closes back on itself (angles sum to more than 180°, and lines eventually meet).
Now, consider NP as a non-Euclidean space of truth – it can have curvatures that represent how possibilities diverge or converge. A hyperbolic NP curvature would mean that as you move through possibilities, they proliferate and diverge exponentially; the space of potential “opens up” endlessly in every direction. This reflects the infinitely open nature of raw possibility – small differences in initial choice could lead to wildly different outcomes, like geodesics on a saddle surface diverging from each other. On the other hand, a spherical NP curvature would represent a situation where the space of possibilities, though expansive, eventually loops back on itself; possibilities converge and reconnect. This could correspond to a scenario where different paths in the NP field lead to similar outcomes or recurring patterns – a kind of mythic closure where everything circles back to a few archetypal narratives. Spherical curvature can symbolize a closed worldview or a strongly structured possibility space (like a culture’s tightly knit mythos where every story leads to the same moral).
What happens when these curved possibility spaces collapse into actual occurrences? One way to see the act of collapse (conscience choosing a P-seed and manifesting P) is as a kind of projection of the curved space onto a flat plane. In that collapse, some of the “distortions” or curvature of the possibility space must resolve into a consistent, flat reality. P-truth is Euclidean in the sense that it has to obey coherent logic and consistency – contradictory possibilities cannot both actualize at once, just as in Euclidean space you can’t have a triangle whose angles sum to both 200° and 270°; you must pick one geometry and stick to it locally. The present truth tends toward a kind of internal consistency and linearity that the space of all possible truths does not have to obey (within NP, you can have contradictory potentials existing side by side because only one will eventually be chosen, or perhaps they diverge into different branches of history or thought).
The metaphor helps illustrate a few points:
- If NP is too hyperbolic (too open), a collapse is hard to achieve because the possibilities keep diverging – it’s like trying to flatten an infinitely flared saddle onto a plane: there’s always “more” coming at the edges. In human terms, this could correspond to times of great chaos or innovation where the range of possibilities is so large that it’s hard to settle on a stable truth. The risk here is disintegration – without a collapse, the truth would fragment into endlessly branching alternatives (analogous to how hyperbolic space has an infinite boundary).
- If NP is too spherical (too closed and looping), a collapse might result in a very limited or parochial truth – like projecting a globe onto a flat map, some distortion is inevitable (Greenland looks huge on a Mercator map, etc.). In our analogy, a spherical NP might correspond to a very rigid mythic structure where everything refers back to itself. Collapsing that onto reality might impose an overly narrow framework on truth, possibly stifling novelty. It might yield a stable truth, but one that’s “curved inward” and not accommodating the full breadth of reality (like a small traditional society where everything is understood within one closed set of myths – coherent but without co-relational meaning).
- The Euclidean P is the middle ground: it is flat enough to allow local consistency and stability, but it can map portions of either hyperbolic or spherical regions piece by piece. Each P-collapse could be seen as taking a small patch of the NP landscape and laying it flat as a piece of present reality. Over time, you can map more of the NP field by such patches (each patch is like one P-truth). You will never map the entire infinite hyperbolic plane or the entire sphere onto one flat sheet without distortion (that’s akin to infinity never fully becoming truth), but you can cover it in an atlas of local maps. That atlas is our accumulated body of truths in time.
In plainer terms, the geometrical metaphor underscores that the present (P) can handle the complex curvature of possibility by flattening it locally. The present moment takes a slice of the complexity, resolves it, and yields a clear truth. Then the next moment takes another slice. If one tried to contain the whole curvature at once – for instance, to realize the infinite all at once – one would either tear the fabric (hyperbolic divergence causing chaos) or warp it (spherical self-containment causing potentially extreme distortion or dogmatism). This metaphor aligns with our earlier caution: infinity (the endless potential of NP) never becomes truth in itself; it must be parceled into finite collapses. And similarly, a totalizing myth (a spherical closed world of meaning) cannot simply be overlaid on reality without careful translation; pieces of it can manifest, but the whole thing at once would either not fit or would crush the diversity of life.
Hyperbolic and spherical curvatures also correspond loosely to the two failure modes we discussed: hyperbolic corresponds to the chaotic scatter of not collapsing (everything flies apart – collapsing into NP yields nothing coherent), and spherical corresponds to the rigid imposition of one structure (everything curving into one point – collapsing into myth yields a single-point perspective that may ignore reality’s breadth). The Euclidean present is the balancing out – it is flat in that it only deals with one piece at a time, but by doing so it can stretch in any direction as needed over time (just as a flat plane can extend indefinitely).
In summary, this metaphor illustrates why the Present is the only “geometry” that can bear the infinite curvature of truth without disintegration: it does so by only dealing with a finite, locally flattenable piece at any given moment. The infinite informs each collapse (the shape of the NP region we’re collapsing from influences the outcome), but the infinite is never fully on the same plane as the truth we speak or live. We always handle it through projections and slices – through present acts.
V: The Present and the Infinite – Finite Vessels of Endless Truth
Our vision has repeatedly highlighted a theme: infinity never becomes truth, but informs all collapse. We should examine this more directly as a metaphysical principle and tie it to why the present moment holds such a privileged position in our framework.
What do we mean by “infinite truth” or “infinite potential” never becomes truth? Simply that the totality of all that could be – the NP field in its entirety, or the sum of all myths in their absolute scope – is never wholly manifest as a single truth within reality. If it were, it would no longer be an infinity of possibilities; it would be one frozen actuality, and all the richness would collapse into a singular state. Reality, as we experience it, doesn’t work like that. Instead, reality gives us an unfolding series of finite truths, each a nugget chipped off the infinite block. Each truth is informed by the unactualized possibilities around it – you often understand something by contrasting it with what could have been – but the unactualized remains unactualized.
This resonates with philosophical and spiritual views on infinity and temporality. Many have observed that the Now is like a moving knife-edge that “cuts” the potential of the future into the actuality of the past. And only this knife-edge is real in an existential sense. In theological terms, one might say only God or eternity holds the infinite whole; humans in time see one facet at a time. Our framework aligns with such perspectives but couches them in a more generalized logic of truth-making: the present is where an interaction with the infinite occurs. Each present moment is like a aperture through which a beam of infinite light passes and becomes a visible ray of truth in our world. The fullness of the light itself (the infinite) is never seen all at once; it would blind or dissolve the finite eye. But that does not mean the infinite is irrelevant – on the contrary, it’s the source of all the light we do see.
This is why we earlier said Present is the only domain capable of bearing infinite truth without disintegration. It bears it by limiting it – by being a fleeting, ever-renewed moment, the present can sustain contact with the infinite continuously but never has to contain it all at once. It is like a small cup under an endless waterfall: the cup is always full in the present; the waterfall flows on. If one tried to catch the whole waterfall in one vessel, the vessel would burst, and nothing coherent would remain.
From a more human perspective, consider how overwhelming it would be if one knew every possibility (good and bad) that the future holds or if one tried to live out all one’s dreams simultaneously. It’s not possible – our sanity and coherence rely on doing things step by step, moment by moment. There’s wisdom in phrases like “one day at a time.” This is not just practical advice but metaphysically grounded: the Present is a buffer that protects us from the paralyzing effect of infinite possibilities and from the mania of infinite ambitions. It forces choices, which, though limiting, actually make meaning possible. A life that tries to remain “everything” ends up nothing in particular; a life that chooses something becomes something real.
We can also reflect on how conscience navigates the triad of NP, myth, and P in light of this. Conscience knows in some sense that it cannot grasp infinity directly. Instead, it uses myth to give a provisional shape or target to the endless potential (infinity “informs” myth by offering a direction – e.g., ultimate goodness, utopia, salvation, enlightenment – all these are infinite ideals). But conscience doesn’t attempt to grab the ideal wholesale; it translates it into finite aims and actions in the present. In doing so, it shows a kind of humility before infinity – acknowledging that we can only embody truth finitely, but we can be informed by the infinitely true.
For example, a person might have the infinite ideal of justice (justice in its fullness is almost an infinite concept – an absolute state where all wrongs are righted). They cannot achieve perfect justice in one stroke; but they let that ideal inform their conscience, and today they perform a just action in a specific situation. That action doesn’t exhaust the ideal of justice, it is a collapse of potential into a bit of justice here and now. Tomorrow, they will need to do it again, in another situation, learning from yesterday’s outcome. Over time, perhaps the world becomes more just. But at no point was “infinite justice” present as a fact; it was always guiding from beyond, through myths of a just society or a divine justice, through principles and dreams. In this way, infinity pervades the process without ever ceasing to be infinite.
This helps guard against two extremes:
- one, the despair that truth or perfection is unattainable (it is, in totality, but that’s by design – we are to chase it, asymptotically, rather than hold it complete; this chase is meaningful and without it we’d have no direction)
- two, the arrogance or fanaticism of thinking one has the Truth in entirety (which often leads to trying to impose an infinite ideal in finite terms and causing harm, akin to collapsing into myth entirely).
Our framework suggests a middle path: truth is both available and elusive. It is available in each present collapse (we do get real truths, however partial), and elusive in that each truth opens the door to further depths of truth not yet realized.
Finally, this perspective underscores a kind of meaningful openness: since infinity never ceases informing collapse, there is always more truth to be discovered, more growth to be had. No present truth is the end of the story. This ensures that the recursive process does not stagnate. We don’t reach a point where we say “all done, nothing more to know or achieve” – because that would imply we’ve exhausted NP or fulfilled the myth entirely, essentially becoming infinite ourselves. Instead, there is a continual becoming. And yet, importantly, at any given step we do have something solid: a truth achieved, a meaning realized, a seed that grew. Therefore, our framework portrays reality as an endless becoming of truth, through finite meaningful steps.
VI: Conscience at the Crossroads – Navigating NP, Myth, and P
Having delved into various facets of the framework, let us circle back to the central actor in this drama: conscience. It is easy to describe the “structure” of NP, P, and myth, but without conscience these structures would not interact purposefully. Conscience is the pilot steering between the Sirens of infinite possibility and the rocks of immediate reality, with the stars of myth as a guide. Let us summarize how conscience accomplishes this navigation and why it is so crucial.
- Listening to Myth (Future Truth as Guide): Conscience absorbs the insights of mythic future-truths. These myths can be cultural stories, personal ideals, religious teachings, or imaginative projections. They supply conscience with a sense of direction or telos. For example, the myth of the hero’s journey might inspire an individual to see their hardships as challenges to overcome rather than meaningless suffering. The myth of a prophesied golden age might lead a society to enact reforms for a better future. Conscience, however, must interpret myth wisely – understanding its symbolic language rather than following it blindly or literally. It asks: what core truth does this myth indicate? How can we honor that truth in reality, step by step? In doing so, conscience uses myth as a compass rather than a map. The compass points north (gives orientation), but one still has to navigate the terrain of reality to actually get somewhere.
- Reading the NP Field (Recognizing Seed-Truths): Conscience surveys the NP realm of possibilities with a discerning eye. Not all possibilities are equal or worth pursuing. Some are dead-ends, some are harmful, some are trivial. Conscience, informed by mythic values and past experience, identifies meaningful seed-truths in the NP field – those possibilities that, if realized, would yield genuine progress or insight. This is akin to a skilled gardener recognizing which seeds are viable and beneficial to plant. In complex situations, this often requires creativity – seeing connections or potentials that are not obvious. Conscience might say, “Given what I know and what I aspire to (mythically), this particular possibility seems ripe – it could lead to the kind of truth we seek.”
- Executing Collapse (Actualizing in the Present): Once a target possibility (P-seed) is chosen, conscience commits to collapsing it into P. This involves decision and action in the present. Here, practical reason, willpower, and clarity come to the fore. The infinite must be pruned away for a moment – one must focus on the finite task or choice at hand. This is where conscience often encounters resistance: doubt, fear, temptation to revert to open possibility (procrastination) or to drift into comforting fantasy (wishful thinking). The moral fortitude of conscience is tested. But a mature conscience follows through, understanding that only through actualization can truth advance.
- Learning and Adapting (Recursive Reflection): After the collapse, conscience evaluates the outcome. Did the realized truth fulfill the expectation? Did it align with the mythic guidance or reveal a different lesson? What unforeseen consequences or new possibilities arose? This reflective step is what makes conscience recursive. It updates its knowledge of both NP and myth. Perhaps the mythic compass needs recalibration (maybe the ideal is understood differently now), or maybe new potential avenues have opened. Conscience might celebrate a success but also see a next step, or it might admit an error and adjust course. Crucially, conscience does not rigidly stick to a single path if feedback indicates otherwise; it remains flexible, because its loyalty is to truth itself, not to any one idea of truth. In the words of our HackerNoon piece, “when conscience hides behind truth, only truth is visible… when it hides before truth, both conscience and truth vanish”. This cryptic phrase can be taken to mean: if conscience subsumes its ego entirely to what is true (hiding behind truth), then what matters is the truth realized (conscience’s work is done humbly). But if conscience puts itself (its fixed notions or pride) ahead of truth, then neither genuine conscience nor truth is served (they vanish into invisibility). Thus, conscience must always aim to serve truth, not impose itself.
- Maintaining Balance (Avoiding the Extremes): Through all these steps, conscience maintains a dynamic balance. It keeps NP, myth, and P in productive tension. If it finds itself too mired in possibilities (NP overload), it reminds itself of the mythic goals and the need to act. If it finds itself too dogmatically driven by a single vision (myth overload), it pays attention to real-world feedback and the diversity of NP (maybe the ideal needs a different approach). If it finds itself clinging to a past truth (being overly P-bound, complacent in “what is”), it remembers the infinite potential still out there and the higher ideals unfulfilled. In short, conscience is like a skilled sailor tacking between different winds, always adjusting to stay on course toward a distant star.
In a well-functioning scenario, myth guides NP toward meaningful collapse via conscience. For example, a community’s myth of justice guides its lawmakers (conscience in collective form) to consider new policies (NP possibilities) and enact laws (P realities) that progressively realize justice. Each law, once enacted, teaches something about what justice really requires, refining the mythic vision and opening up new possibilities for improvement. Likewise, an individual’s conscience might use a personal myth of being a healer to guide career choices, pick up skills (NP possibilities), and take on actual roles or actions (P) that heal others. Over time, that person understands better what healing truly means, perhaps reshaping their mythic self-image and identifying further potentials to grow into.
Thus, the relationship is symbiotic: myth without conscience and action remains inert; NP without myth and conscience is aimless; P without drawing from NP and myth becomes stagnant. Conscience is the living connection that keeps truth flowing between the three realms.
VII: Conclusion
We have constructed a metaphysical framework in which NP (uncollapsed seed-truth), P (collapsed present-truth), myth (future-truth), and conscience (the agent of collapse) form an integrated system describing how truth emerges and evolves. In this framework, NP represents the infinite potential of truth – the richly structured field of what could be true – while P represents the finite realization of truth – the concrete actuality that is true here and now. Myth stands as the horizon of meaning, the not-yet-actual narrative or ideal that gives shape to our aspirations and interpretations, essentially the face of truth we glimpse on the frontier between the known and unknown. Conscience is the linchpin: the faculty that perceives, judges, and acts, thereby collapsing potential into actuality in a guided, meaningful way.
We have emphasized several key principles of this framework:
- Potential vs. Actuality: NP (potential truth) is not a chaotic void but an “infinitely potential” blueprint containing all that can become real. P (actual truth) is the fulfillment of one of those possibilities in the present moment. The interplay of NP and P recapitulates an old philosophical insight – that reality consists of both what exists and what is possible, with the possible continuously flowing into the actual.
- The Role of Myth: Myth was framed as “future-truth,” capturing truths that are always in the becoming. Myths provide structured uncertainty – they carry enduring wisdom or patterns (so they are not arbitrary), yet they do not pinpoint a single outcome (so they remain open). This makes myth a powerful guide for conscience: myth offers a vision to strive for, without dictating every detail. As a local collapse of global truth into narrative, myth stabilizes some truth while keeping some mystery, ensuring that cultures and individuals remain in a generative search for deeper understanding rather than claiming to possess all truth outright. However, we cautioned that myth must inspire, not imprison; taken too literally or absolutely, myth can lead to incoherence or fanaticism.
- Collapse Dynamics: We analyzed the consequences of how collapse is handled. Collapsing into NP (refusing to actualize) leads to stagnation and wasted potential. Collapsing into myth (over-identifying with future visions at the expense of present reality) leads to incoherence and possibly destructive illusions. Collapsing into P (the ideal mode) yields a stepwise, recursive process of becoming, wherein each realization is grounded and contributes to an ongoing growth. This dynamic highlights the metaphysical necessity of the Present: only the present can mediate between the endless openness of the future and the solidifying closure of the past, by taking just the “right-sized” slice of infinity at each moment.
- Recursive Truth and Illumination: A core insight of our framework is that truth emerges recursively. Each act of realizing a truth (each P-collapse) teaches us something about truth itself, revealing structures and relationships that were hidden in the space of possibilities. Knowledge and meaning thus expand in a feedback loop. The structure of the NP seed is illuminated by its fruiting in P, much as solving one part of a puzzle sheds light on the remaining parts. This makes the pursuit of truth a journey in time, where even errors and surprises become part of the clarification of the original blueprint. Over time, conscience and culture can build increasingly coherent and encompassing truths through this iterative refinement.
- Geometrical Metaphor – Curvature to Flatness: We proposed an analogy where NP’s potential space might be “curved” (hyperbolically divergent or spherically convergent), whereas P’s realized truth is “flatly” consistent. This visual metaphor was used to convey why large-scale possibility or absolute structures cannot be instantiated wholesale without distortion; instead, they must be realized in patches that flatten out the local curvature. The present moment acts like a projection plane where a portion of the curved infinity is resolved into a workable reality. This reinforced the idea that infinite truth informs each finite truth without ever becoming fully finite – an idea resonant with theological and philosophical notions of an infinite that manifests partially but never exhaustively in the finite world.
- The Conscience’s Navigation: Finally, we highlighted how conscience, operating with free will and insight, navigates between NP, myth, and P. It listens to the guidance of mythic future-truth (ensuring collapses are meaningful and value-oriented), it evaluates the NP field to choose promising and principled potentials, and it executes actual collapses into P, thereafter learning from the outcomes. Conscience is thus the dynamic principle of synthesis in this metaphysical model – the reason the otherwise abstract elements of NP, P, and myth result in a living, developing truth. Conscience balances openness and commitment, imagination and practicality, ideals and facts. In a way, conscience is the present moment in its active, creative aspect – it’s where the buck stops, where decisions are made that shape reality.
In conclusion, the framework presented – which we have titled “The Present of Collapse” – suggests that truth is not a static entity but a living process. It is the process of endless potential being guided by meaningful form and collapsed into present reality through conscious choice. In this view, truth has a triadic structure (NP–Myth–P) enacted by a recursive agent (Conscience). This structure accounts for why truth has aspects of eternal mystery (there’s always more beyond what we know), concrete certainty (some things are definitively true now), and aspirational narrative (we sense patterns or destinies that draw us onward). The logic of collapse and recursion offers a way to think about change and choice that neither reduces truth to arbitrary relativism nor to fixed absolutism: truth unfolds and is made real piece by piece, and in doing so, it remains ever aligned with an infinite backdrop of meaning that keeps it from being merely relative or “small.”
Such a metaphysical framework can have various implications. It provides a lens to interpret personal growth, scientific discovery, social progress, and even cosmic evolution as a unified story of truth realizing itself. It honors the role of imagination and myth in human life, without sacrificing the importance of rational coherence and empirical grounding. It places moral and intellectual conscience at the heart of reality’s unfolding, hinting that perhaps the universe’s truths are not just “out there” to find, but also “in here” to create responsibly. In sum, the Present of Collapse framework invites us to see ourselves as participants in a recursive dance of truth – always choosing, always learning, guided by ideals, grounded in reality, and never exhausting the richness of what can be known. It is a vision that is both humbling (for it acknowledges the endless and the unknown) and empowering (for it asserts the value of our choices and the possibility of progress). And ultimately, it portrays a cosmos where truth is less a monolithic monument and more an ever-flowing river – one we navigate in our finite boats of the present, with currents from the infinite deep and stars of meaning overhead, always moving toward a horizon we never fully reach but continually approach.
VIII: Addendum: On the P vs NP Question
To answer the foundational question through the lens of this metaphysical framework:
P is indeed different from NP globally.
A global equivalence between P and NP would imply a resolution of the universe — a total collapse of all potential into manifest form. But the universe, as shown, resists total resolution, because it is structured upon recursive unfolding, not finality. The only “resolution” beyond such recursion would be an atemporal, adimensional, and a-existential truth — a domain outside of being itself, inaccessible to form. And maybe this is the very domain of absolute Truth, truthfullness across infinite posibility.
However:
On local terms, P is retrocausally equal to NP.
That is, each instance of present truth (P) reflects a coherent collapse of seed-potential (NP), such that from within the recursion, the emergence appears seamless. P unfolds what NP held, not because they are the same, but because conscience recursively integrates what it once only observed.
Thus, the resolution of P ≠ NP is not computational, but ontological: The difference protects reality, and the local equivalence permits it to grow.
