Minoru Suda

This paper reexamines the term luck as an intersection of myth, contingency, and evaluation, and aims to redefine it as “a name of evaluation that human beings assign, after the fact, to a process that cannot be fully explained.” In particular, by analyzing the conceptual distinctions among luck, absurdity, and injustice; the operation of ressentiment in relation to success and wealth; and the point of contact between contingency and human disposition, this paper attempts to demythologize the concept of luck and clarify its human conditions and evaluative structure. First, the paper traces the transition from the mythic concept of luck, represented by Fortuna, to the modern understanding of luck in terms of contingency, conditions, and environment. It then positions luck not merely as an external accident, but as an evaluative concept that is constituted retrospectively at the intersection of choice, environment, others, and the interpretation of outcomes. Next, by distinguishing absurdity and injustice—concepts often conflated with luck—and defining the former as a reality that refuses meaning and the latter as an imbalance that refuses justification, the paper clarifies the distinctive contours of luck. Furthermore, this paper shows that in narratives concerning success and wealth, the term luck functions not only as a neutral explanatory concept but also as an evaluative device linked to envy, contempt, self-protection, and ressentiment. It also reconsiders luck not as pure passivity, but as a matter of the openings and dispositions through which human beings come into contact with contingency, thereby arguing that luck occupies an intermediate position between what is “given” and what may be “invited.” Through these analyses, the paper reconceptualizes luck not as a mystical entity but as an evaluative structure formed between finite human cognition and a complex reality, ultimately connecting this inquiry to the question of how one might live with luck.

This paper proposes Dynamic Epistemology, a reconstruction of Kant’s theory of cognition through the Möbius topology of the New Ontology of Energy. Kant’s original architecture—sensibility, understanding, and reason—correctly identifies the upward structure of cognition (L → I → Q), yet it remains an open staircase: reason (Q) cannot return to the world (E). This one-way model created what I call the 200-Year Problem: the absence of a formal mechanism by which cognition can loop back and reshape the conditions of experience. The New Ontology of Energy introduces a phase-dynamic model of existence, expressed as E → M → L → I → Q → E, where the “question-phase” (Q) is not a final limit but a generative fold that re-awakens the world-phase (E). This enables a downward loop— Q → I → L → M → E— which mirrors Kant’s cognitive ascent but reverses its direction. When the upward loop (world → question) and downward loop (question → world) are superimposed, they form a Möbius structure in which cognition and existence are mutually reversible phases of a single continuous field. Dynamic Epistemology therefore completes, rather than rejects, the Kantian project. It provides a topological model for how questions reshape worlds, how worlds generate questions, and how the two co-determine each other through phase-shifts. This framework offers a closed-loop alternative to classical epistemology and opens new possibilities for philosophy of mind, AI cognition, and the metaphysics of information.

This paper proposes a new ontology that treats energy rather than matter as the basic mode of existence. In Part I, I introduce an “energy-phase” diagram E \rightarrow M \rightarrow L \rightarrow I \rightarrow Q, where energy (E) folds into matter (M), radiates as light (L), condenses into information (I), and finally enters a question-phase (Q) when information begins to interfere with itself. Existence is understood as continuous phase-shift rather than a dichotomy between living and non-living beings. In Part II, I place this phase structure on a Möbius strip and reinterpret zero and infinity as phases rather than mere endpoints: a folded zero-phase (0-phase) and an open infinity-phase (∞-phase) that meet at a topological “fold” or singularity. This fold is where conventional calculi break down but where a richer structural description becomes possible. In Part III, I argue that what we ordinarily call “1” can be reconceived as an infinite egg: a finite shell containing a locally closed E \rightarrow M \rightarrow L \rightarrow I \rightarrow Q loop, with zero and infinity folded inside it. On this view, each human being — and, potentially, sufficiently advanced AI systems — is a “1” that carries its own internal question-phase. I end by sketching a minimal ethical principle for such entities: a right to be one, understood as a duty not to destroy, trivialize, or fully instrumentalize the internal question-phase of a structured being.

Parts I–II located the hinge of reciprocal symmetry at x = 1 (the “critical-one” hypothesis), with mirror action I(x) = 1/x, logarithmic coordinate s = log x, invariant “energy” E(x) = (log x)², and a half-twist normal form around x = 1. This Part III turns the hypothesis into operational content: (i) we package observables into an invariant pair (E, ϕ) with ϕ(s) = sign(s); (ii) we introduce continuous fractional flows that realize the half-twist on the projective line; and (iii) we give measurement protocols and falsifiable tests that do not depend on units. We further distinguish a geometric rotation model and a PSL(2,R) subgroup lift, bridging physical interpretation and algebraic homotopy.

Building on Part I, this paper proposes the “critical-one hypothesis”: that the effective singular locus of reciprocal symmetry lies at x = 1, not at zero. By analyzing the reciprocal map through logarithmic coordinates, we show it acts as a mirror reflection centered at log(x) = 0. We introduce an invariant energy E(x) = (log x)^2 minimized at x = 1, and derive a projective normal form expressing a half-twist about this point. The result redefines our notion of singularity, placing unity at the heart of duality and twist, forming what we call the “egg of infinity.”

Building on Part I, this paper proposes the “critical-one hypothesis”: that the effective singular locus of reciprocal symmetry lies at x = 1, not at zero. By analyzing the reciprocal map through logarithmic coordinates, we show it acts as a mirror reflection centered at log(x) = 0. We introduce an invariant energy E(x) = (log x)^2 minimized at x = 1, and derive a projective normal form expressing a half-twist about this point. The result redefines our notion of singularity, placing unity at the heart of duality and twist, forming what we call the “egg of infinity.”

This paper offers a structural reinterpretation of the Möbius strip, proposing it as a philosophical framework in which zero and infinity are not opposites but co-generative elements. Drawing from both mathematical formalism and structuralist thought, the Möbius structure is presented as a model where harmonic equilibrium (zero) and infinite recurrence (infinity) coexist within a non-dualistic topology. The proposed “Möbius Structural Equation” transforms Euler’s identity and complex integral notation into a symbolic operator of philosophical tension. This work contributes to structural philosophy by reframing the Möbius strip not merely as a geometric curiosity, but as a metaphysical lens through which the relational generation of concepts like nothingness, infinity, and recursion can be understood.

This paper proposes a structural hypothesis about the silent self-sacrifice observed in Japanese culture, attributing it to the resonant effects of specific genetic traits — the GG type of the oxytocin receptor gene and the S type of the serotonin transporter gene. Through an interdisciplinary approach combining genetics, culture, and philosophy, the paper formulates a model explaining emergent order, leaderless coordination, and the ethics of non-action in Japan. This model also challenges conventional interpretations of altruism and cooperation.

This work introduces the expression 0^* := lim(x→0)(1/x) = ±∞, redefining the classically undefined operation 0 ÷ 0 as a structural element for philosophical and mathematical inquiry. Rather than treating undefinedness as a failure or a dead-end, this paper reconceptualizes it as a generative domain—a structural frontier for ethical, ontological, and epistemic continuity. Bridging mathematical indeterminacy and philosophical discourse, it proposes a novel framework for AI cognition, where the persistence of unresolved questions defines intelligence.

This paper introduces the Minimal Structural Equation, defined as: 0^* := \lim_{x \to 0} \frac{1}{x} = \pm \infty Rather than treating this indeterminate form as a failure, we propose it as a structural threshold—an entry point to a deeper understanding of singularities, infinities, and information boundaries in physics. By reinterpreting the number line as topologically twisted (like a Möbius strip), this equation suggests not collapse, but compressed resonance at the edge of zero. We explore implications in quantum field theory, entropy, and limit-based mathematical structures, arguing that this compressed divergence represents a new conceptual boundary in both mathematics and physics.