Modern scientific explanations across physics, biology, and cognitive science rely on a shared set of idealized assumptions, including unbounded integration, perfect global accessibility, fully transparent self-modeling, disembodied information processing, and memory without persistent physical storage. In this work, we conduct a large-scale, constraint-driven computational investigation into the joint admissibility of these assumptions under irreducible physical and informational constraints. Without introducing new entities, forces, or optimization objectives, we explore whether any self-consistent realization exists in which all such assumptions can coexist. Across an ensemble of 8,192 independent trajectories, no jointly admissible configuration was found. Instead, all systems entered a structurally defined no-go region characterized by instability, causal overload, and collapse of self-consistent explanatory state. A systematic assumption-removal analysis reveals that admissibility is restored upon removal of any single assumption from a restricted subset, yielding a uniquely constrained and stable explanatory structure. These results establish a forced assumption sacrifice theorem: reality admits no explanatory framework in which all standard explanatory ideals are simultaneously valid. Explanation itself is shown to be a constrained dynamical regime, imposing principled limits on transparency, integration, and abstraction across scientific domains.
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Drew Slawson
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Drew Slawson (Sun,) studied this question.
www.synapsesocial.com/papers/6978551eccb046adae5174f6 — DOI: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18365637