Read the proof



To the citizens of any possible World,

those of Bielefeld as well, this is a safe place, we hate haters and we love all of ourselves with no contradiction in it. Entering and remaining here you recognize yourself as part of the Life in the Universe and accept the rule to respect, not to tolerate, all others similar to you. I will write in this barbaric language and before judging me for my mistakes you must know that it is not my native language, not even my second, it is my third language. In my head there are many Babylon, the chaos is immense, but this also means that there are more towers of Babel and when one falls, immediately, another is already ready to reach the sky. Now to the less serious things.

Context of a contest

In August 2019, the insipid city of Bielefeld, to free itself after 25 years of a silly conspiracy theory born of a bad joke, launched a self-promotional campaign linked to a competition: a million euro prize to the first that would have shown irrefutably the non-existence of Bielefeld by 4 September 2019, #Bielefeldmillion. The major newspapers of the world have guaranteed free advertising to the city thanks to the expedient, from Bielefeld's point of view a mission successfully accomplished. But what about the participants? According to the organizers, of the approximately 2,000 conspiracy theorists no one has conclusively demonstrated the non-existence of the city, so they performed a ceremony with a tombstone, which looks like a meteorite, to declare the conspiracy dead and the city too beautiful not to exist. To sum it up in one word: bullshit.

Goodbye Bielefeld conspiracy or welcome Bielefeld scam?

I'm not a conspiracy theorist, I've never been and never will be, I firmly believe, as everyone should believe, that Nessie, Sasquatch, Chupacabra, Trump, Bolsonaro, Salvini, Johnson, Netanyahu, Steve Bannon and all their associates are simply fake monsters. But I decided to participate, for intellectual pleasure, both because I like to transform what is believed impossible into possible and because, by reading the problem, I had mentally identified a possible solution. And it hasn't even been difficult, I'm humble in everything, but not about my thinking.

The day after I sent my demonstration, I must admit that I started to dream a little with my eyes open, because a well-known German newspaper, the "Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung" published an article, which was not the usual official press release.

In this article, some parts caught my attention:

Die meisten von ihnen kommen aus Deutschland, jeder fünfte Beweis aber wurde per Mail aus dem Ausland abgeschickt. Unter den Einsendern sind Menschen aus Weißrussland, Japan und Neuseeland, aus Kanada, Australien und Südamerika.

Most of them come from Germany, but one fifth of the proofs was sent by mail from abroad. Among the submitters are people from Belarus, Japan and New Zealand, Canada, Australia and South America.

Here I noticed South America, the name of a continent and not of a country as in other cases, vaguely positioned last. Then more:

„Die Bandbreite der Beweise ist riesig“, berichtet Franzke. Und einige seien „richtig gut gemacht“.

"The range of evidence is huge," says Franzke. And some were "really well done".


Die aussichtsreichsten Bewerber argumentierten mit der Erkenntnistheorie, die auf philosophischer Basis die Voraussetzungen für Erkenntnisgewinn hinterfragt.

The most promising candidates argued with epistemology, which questioned the prerequisites for gaining knowledge on a philosophical basis.

If you are now thinking that they could refer to anyone, it is only because you have not yet read my Proof.
After reading it, there is no need to be an expert in conversation analysis to understand that probably it refers to mine.

I am certainly a person with immense self-esteem, but I am not a mythomaniac, I do not say that my proof is absolutely irrefutable, I only say that until now it has not been falsified and I am publishing it so that everyone can try to refute it. I am here ready to respond and to analyze the refutations and to admit its falsification in case it happens. But it hasn't happened yet.

Although the organizers have spoken and written several times, even in their official announcements, of having received proofs concerning the meaning of existence, after the declaration of no winner, any reference to these philosophical proofs has disappeared. Even South America and Brazil have disappeared in their subsequent press releases.

In the section evidences and refutations on their site there is no category concerning philosophical evidence and obviously my proof was not published.

To put an end to a false conspiracy theory they created a real conspiracy, this is the only real genius of their campaign.

Money VERSUS Intelligence

The words order is not accidental, because money always plays home, because it can buy any home.

I am not rich, I have never been rich, I do not own a house of my own, nor extravagant things, yet I am happy, very happy. Or at least I am while looking inside myself and close to me, but as soon as I look away and look at the rest of the world, happiness moves away.
I have many faults, but greed is not one of them, I am not greedy for money, I am not greedy for luxury, I am not greedy for fame, I am not greedy for inebriation or unbridled pleasure. I like to collect thoughts, it's a very cheap hobby that should spread a little.

Obviously a million euro would have changed my life a bit, but if I had won I would have spent at least half of the amount on the creation of a foundation to help the world in an intelligent way. I would like to live in a world where for everyone there was no need for money to be happy. A world where a person could die of hunger only if there were no more food on the planet and not because there is no more money in his pockets. And someone who thinks he's smart, but is not, might say "of course, why don't you add peace to the world and take part in some beauty contest, you've got the speech ready". Yes, I could win a beauty contest and I would also like peace in the world, for this I have no doubt that I am better than that not so smart person and I think, arrogantly, that it would take more people like me and fewer not so smart.

Everyone was so sure that it was impossible to prove the non-existence of Bielefeld that they began to add other prizes to the million euro and with those there could have been better uses, compared to the party suggested by some.
A million pudding sachets: a new meaning could have been given to the strange proverb "the proof of the pudding".
One million condoms, to be donated to health organizations.
A million liters of drinking water that, if possible, would have been donated to the poorest families in the city to relieve them of at least one expense.
A place in the local soccer team that could have been auctioned off among the fans to finance something good, I never liked to run after a ball.
A million pralines, some I think I would have eaten and the rest to be distributed to share the joy.
A frozen pizza: to donate to whom had expressly requested it, because for me it's a no thanks, I can make my pizzas and they are exceptional.
Finally there was also a 24-carat gold vibrator: which I would have kept as a trophy to remind to all the dicks in the world that their existence is not necessary.

Maybe I'm not the one who lost the most.

Even the smarty-pants from "Fridays for future" of Bielefeld wanted to re-launch by offering one million euro to those who had demonstrated that climate change does not exist.

Even young people unfortunately set limits to imagination and intelligence. A Proof that questions the existence of climate change is possible, but not like the idiots who put on their coats and take a selfie on the snow, but deconstructing and analyzing the meaning of climate and above all of change, but if you don't have understood the proof of the non-existence of Bielefeld, you are not ready for this one. And if Bielefeld didn't reward me, I don't think "Fridays for future" would have.

But my demonstration would not have diminished the struggle for change, indeed it would have encouraged it.

Climate change is just one aspect of a much bigger problem as clearly explained in an article that appeared more than two years ago, before worrying about the environment became cool, in The Guardian:

A "biological annihilation" of wildlife in recent decades means a sixth mass extinction in Earth's history and is more severe than previously feared, according to research.
Scientists analyzed both common and rare species and found billions of regional or local populations have been lost. They are overpopulated, and they are overwhelmed.
Wildlife is dying out two to habitat destruction, overhunting, toxic pollution, invasion by alien species and climate change. But the ultimate cause of all factors is "the human overpopulation and continued population growth, and overconsumption, especially by the rich", say the scientists.

Not all the science is good, it is important to learn to distinguish, who proposes to stop having children is practically proposing the plot of Idiocracy, a film, not a good film, but with a good starting idea, which shows a world where intelligent people, or sensitive to the environment in our case, stop having children and only idiots reproduce. Intelligence is not genetic, from a fool an intelligent can be born and vice versa, but unfortunately intelligence is influenced by the environment in which one must develop and a world full of stupids does not bode well.

I want to close the environmental discussion with some advice, if you want to change the world you must understand the answers, the feedback you receive from those around you. If you feel cool and everyone wants to follow you, if doors of rooms of power are opened to make you talk, if they pretend to listen to you, you are probably doing everything wrong.

The real struggle for change in the world is absolute sacrifice and not many are so inclined to make sacrifices.

We've come to this point so low because of human stupidity and not going to school on Friday doesn't seem like a good way to fight stupidity.

It's like wanting to change bad politics by not going to vote. It does not work, period. Manifesting is right and sometimes even fun, but it will not change the world or at least it cannot succeed in time to save it. The system needs a valve to release the pressure from time to time, so as not to burst, you, young people, in this moment are the perfect valve.

Now someone will think: but what can we do, we are only children, young people?

You have a power that you don't even imagine, but to be used it requires sacrifices, sacrifices that many of you probably won't be willing to make, not even to save the world.

Instead of doing a school strike, do a consumer strike. Stop consuming for a few weeks, for a few months. Do not buy anything that is not essential, buy food only from local producers, no mobile phones, no applications, turn off televisions, don't use social networks, don't buy clothes from big brands, because if they want to sell you something again, those who are destroying the world have to understand that they must change behavior. Pause, enjoy yourself in a simpler way, dedicate yourself to studying and friends, change your lifestyle. I guarantee you that the change you want will happen much faster.

But now, who am I to give you advice? What I write is only bullshit, at least according to Bielefeld.

Me and my proof

  1. For Bielefeld I didn't win; it could happen.
  2. They called me a conspiracy theorist along with all the other participants; I consider it a serious lack of respect for my efforts.
  3. They did not refute my proof, they did not publish it, they ignored it, they hid it; no, I really don't accept that.

This is why I decided to give Bielefeld a present on my birthday, because I am generous and not vindictive, or not.

For 25 years they have complained about a silly conspiracy theory born of a bad joke.
For those who didn't know, according to the joke, Bielefeld does not exist because to the following three questions anyone should answer with no:

    Do you know anybody from Bielefeld?
    Have you ever been to Bielefeld?
    Do you know anybody who has ever been to Bielefeld?

The joke is of the kind negation as an end in itself.
It never works well. This is why it has degenerated into a conspiracy theory.

An example:
Someone at random: Mom, I proved that I am the smartest man on the planet.
Mom: No, you didn't.
Someone at random: Yes, I did.
Mom: Did they recognize you for this?
Someone at random: No.
Mom: Did they reward you for this?
Someone at random: No.
Mom: Did you gain something for this?
Someone at random: No.
Mom: So you haven't proved it.

For negationists, the truth does not matter, for them it matters the effects, the perceptions or their personal evaluation criteria, their quality mark "I decide what is true" as in the case of one of the oldest examples of this type:

24 Θωμᾶς δὲ εἷς ἐκ τῶν δώδεκα, ὁ λεγόμενος Δίδυμος, οὐκ ἦν μετ’ αὐτῶν ὅτε ἦλθεν ὁ Ἰησοῦς. 25 ἔλεγον οὖν αὐτῷ οἱ ἄλλοι μαθηταί· ἑωράκαμεν τὸν Κύριον. ὁ δὲ εἶπεν αὐτοῖς· ἐὰν μὴ ἴδω ἐν ταῖς χερσὶν αὐτοῦ τὸν τύπον τῶν ἥλων, καὶ βάλω τὸν δάκτυλόν μου εἰς τὸν τύπον τῶν ἥλων, καὶ βάλω τὴν χεῖρά μου εἰς τὴν πλευρὰν αὐτοῦ, οὐ μὴ πιστεύσω.

24 But Thomas, one of the twelve, called Didymus, was not with them when Jesus came. 25 The other disciples therefore said unto him, We have seen the Lord. But he said unto them, Except I shall see in his hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and thrust my hand into his side, I will not believe.

The negation as an end in itself is often used or by stupid people, like many politicians, who deny anything they don't like without even adding the slightest explanation, or cruel people (mother?).

I propose a different kind of joke, of the associative juxtaposition type, it always works. No matter how you answer the questions.

Bielefeld. Bullshit.

It's like:

"Shave and a Haircut" and "two bits";
"Mah Nà Mah Nà" and "Do doo be-do-do";
Bielefeld will be "Minnie the Moocher" of the cities.

Instead of a conspiracy theory with an expiration date, I give Bielefeld an eternal joke.

From now on, when someone says he comes from Bielefeld he will not hear, "that does not exist", he will hear: bullshit!
Here with the art of maieutic I brought it into the world, now I entrust this joke to the wise art of all people in a good mood to make it grow and become mature in the best way. The possibilities are endless.

Returning to the matter of the proof, I asked myself: why, if they refuted it, they didn't publish it? If you succeed in outsmarting something smart, you boast, it's in human nature. But no, they didn't. I could only find three logical explanations:

1 - They didn't understand what I wrote in the proof. They looked at it with the classic superiority of a peer reviewer (overestimating themselves a lot) and they dismissed it as not worthy of attention, as literary buffoonery.

2 - They understood it and they didn't know how to refute it and either they didn't want/could pay the prize or they didn't want to lose the tombstone and the ceremony they had prepared.

3 - They understood it, maybe they also wanted to reward it, but they couldn't publish it because of the social and political critics contained in the proof (to Nazism among other things), because this would have bothered someone in the city too much. And it's always easy to find someone with some Nazi in the closet.

These are the only possible reasons I have found. None of them is a good one or a valid reason.

I don't have a title, that's why I invented one, I couldn't introduce myself without it in a city where even the pudding is a doctor.

I did not complete my studies, but this does not mean that I did not study, on the contrary, I never stopped studying.
I left the university because unfortunately I was bored and I didn't feel satisfied, but already at my first exam, theoretical philosophy, I received, in addition to the highest grades cum laude, all verifiable, even public praise in front of all the other students by one of the greatest Italian epistemologists and by the other two professors who had examined me for hours. And I hadn't even followed their lessons, they have never seen me before. I may not be as foolish as Bielefeld believes.

Now to help Bielefeld's friends understand what I wrote, deliberately in a discursive and cheerful way, I will build a small guide to reading and better understanding the proof.

In my proof, without going into the philosophical details of the questions, I show:
A - that Bielefeld is not an individual object;
B - that if Bielefeld is not an individual object then it should be a set of objects and a set of objects is either determined by its properties or it is determined by an enumeration of its elements, a set undefined and uncountable at the same time does not exist, it is subjective and not identifiable;
(I prefer to use different words depending on whether we talk about sets defined through the properties or through the enumeration of their elements.)
C - Bielefeld is not a set that can be represented by a finite number of properties;
D - Bielefeld is not an identifiable set by enumerating its elements;
E - Bielefeld is not matter, because considering it as matter, regardless of what is the exact theory of matter (quantum, strings or Democritus' atoms), by simply changing its position in space, it is no longer identifiable;
F - if Bielefeld is something then it could simply be a relationship of different objects with an approximate space, a subjective relationship that represents something different for each individual, but which is conventionally and collectively associated with a given name.

A, B, C and D contain a mathematical argument, logic and set theory;
E completes the picture with physics;
F is the possible answer to the question: what is then Bielefeld?

Before proving the existence or non-existence of something, this something must be defined. I am curious to hear the definitions given by those who will attempt to refute my proof. My proof consists of various parts connected by disjunctions, if the logic is not known in Bielefeld, I inform you that to refute it you will have to prove that the parts are all false, if one part is true then the proof is true, magic of disjunction. Good luck with that. Now I'm tired, it's up to you to do something. Maybe I deserved a million euro and they didn't give it to me. I reacted laughing, what else can we do in the absence of justice? Erasmus of Rotterdam in "The Praise of Folly" teaches that if the world is crazy then, Crazyness, when it speaks, tells the truth. If the world is bullshit, perhaps the same is true. And if you think I'm crazy, go and read what Umberto Eco writes in Foucault's Pendulum: "In the world there are the cretins, the imbeciles, the stupids and the crazies". The choice is yours.

If you are crazy like me you can give me your endorsement.
If you want to refute my proof or want to discuss the universe you can do it in the forum.
If you want to report some bullshit or insult me or ask me questions that may never be answered or send feedback about the site, you can do it here.
If you are from Bielefeld: imagine me as I laugh.

This site was launched on September 27th 2019, I believe that time will prove me right: but how long will it have to pass?

The truth never remains hidden forever.
He who laughs last, laughs best.