The breakthrough with Alternative Facts is the concept of the
context
and
motive
. A context is a maximal set of propositons, axiomatic or otherwise,which can simultaneously be considered true. While the context as such doesnot offer anything beyond the standard concept of formal systems, they becomeconsiderably more powerful when we combine them with
motives
. A motive,intuitively speaking, describe, the purpose of the propositons and the reasoningsteps that can be applied to them. Formally, they consist of constraints on thelengths of logical chains of reasoning within the system. They separate logicalchains of reasoning into
pro-motive
chains and
counter-motive
chains. Pro-motive chains are the logical chains of reasoning that lead from propositionsexplicitly included in the context to the desired logical conclusion. Counter-motive chains lead from the same propositons to the negation of the desiredconclusion. Any chain of reasoning has a length consisting of the number of logical steps taken. Within a motive, we define limits to each class of chain.Typically, the length limit of counter-motive chains is chosen to be smaller thanfor pro-motive chains.A system of Alternative Facts is considered consistent when any attemptto establish a contradiction within the system requires more logical steps thanallowed by the length limit of counter-motive chains. This is particularly usefulin using AFs to arrive at a desired outcome when reasoning time and spaceis limited such as often occurs in situations such as class room lectures, printpublication and television interviews.
3 Proof of the Riemann Hypothesis using AF
We first posit the proposition which is the standard statement of the RH. Inthis case, we can take the context to be a private one consisting solely of thisproposition and the statement that the
ζ
function is equal to the function
θ
(
z
) =
z
−
1
/
2 at all points in the positive real half-plane and analytically continuedoutside of that plane. The motive,
M
, is taken simply as the desire to proveRH and we choose a limit of
∞
and 0 for pro-motive and counter-motive chainsrespectively.This function clearly has a unique critical point at
z
= 1
/
2 therefore provingthe RH within this context and under this motive. By extending this contextto include all other mathematical statements, except those contradicting RH,we prove RH in the most general context in which it is true. Maximally generalcontexts are referred to as
huge
.We note however that this does not preclude the existence of other contextsand motives in which the hypothesis is false. We leave as an open problem thequestion of whether such a context exists and whether it is huge.2