That the agent comes from within is not unthinkable. I've been able to show that
not only are particular hypersets self-defining, but the very concept of a
hyperset is self-defining! Most formal systems build on axioms, but hypersets
don't need axioms. Basically all you have to do is to 1) assume the axiomatic
system of set theory. 2) define hypersets as a special kind of set 3) show that
the axiomatic assumptions of 1 can be deduced from hyperset properties. In more
detail:
0. A set has an inside, outside and a boundary. The inside, outside and
boundary are defined reciprocally. Each member of the triplet is defined by
the two others.
1. That which is inside the set is a member of the set.
2. A hyperset is a set which contains itself as a member.
3. There are exactly two consistent perspectives on a hyperset. An *inside*
perspective (Heursistic) and an *outside* perspective (Reflective). The
Heuristic view is anticipating, unfolding the content of the hyperset. The
Reflective view is observing, descriptive and distant. It sees the relations
of the hyperset but does not anticipate and unfold them.
4. The inside view leads to infinite regression while the outside view is
finite. This creates a distinct gap between the two viewpoints. This gap is
the difference between finity and infinity. We define this difference as the
*boundary* between the inside and the outside perspective, thus producing the
three assumptions of 0.
Basically the above is a variation of Spencer-Brown's Laws of Form but is not
axiomatic, but self-defining.
Onar.