If there is a universal.
there does not exist
a single, universal algorithm

—Do the Opposite!

enabling determining with correctness
for every possible program
every possible process, any mechanism

—Do the Opposite!

—existing or theoretical—
whether program, process and mechanism
will halt or run forever

—Do the Opposite!

on any given input
with thermodynamics and
Kelvin’s equalizing coldness

—Do the Opposite!

the universal
of non-existence
of a universal solution

—Do the Opposite!

of an all encompassing singularity
its non-existence in absolutes
justifies existence of divergences

—Do the Opposite!

any ultimatum attempting
halt or loop forever for all
has a likelihood to fail

—Do the Opposite!

with failure if it too submitting
is but a perspective
taken from intent

—Do the Opposite!

failure, ah soil for fertility, transcoded
is emergence observed
if not with certainty

—Do the Opposite!

that’s a solution
of non-absoluteness
by eating itself giving birth

—Do the Opposite!

a forbidden fruit, an apple,
a sin, a hack, a mod, a jailbreak
an affordance false, a law broken

—Do the Opposite!

turned into actuality of
life, if complexes of oppositions
do they loop or do they end?

Yet, if life
more than pathological programs
where pathologies

trimmed to a powder of hope: sneeze
doing the opposite of the opposite
of the opposite of a stone

infinitely consistent:
loop and halt
simultaneously and error prone

unanswering, do the opposite:

                    —animasuri’24

a trigger

Copeland, B. J. (ed.), 2004, The Essential Turing: Seminal Writings in Computing, Logic, Philosophy, Artificial Intelligence, and Artificial Life, Oxford: Clarendon
Press. doi:10.1093/oso/9780198250791.001.0001