Theory and The Game

The game is unwinnable from any perspective. This must be found false, but cannot be proven true or false except by a negative, which is to say all scenarios are conceived of, in some way, where another state (a different victor) is found not to lead to the end of this game. This would be The Bard's Coin as I have written it. The answer to this equation would balance, from our perspective, with the Theory of Everything, I'm guessing on a quantum or related level. If each and all become(s) required to calculate, rather than perish by not calculating on this level, then proving negatives will no longer be impossible, opening many doors within science and philosophy.

Perhaps this perspective- where The Theory of Everything balances with and leads to who the victor of this first game is- works strictly for an entity possessing physical form before conscious form on the level that is possessed by mankind currently (self-awareness and the like). This is to say that an entity like a human, where our flesh exists before our consciousness enters it, would likely have a different theory balancing the fate of the first game- who wins, how the game is won, etc.- than an entity whose consciousness existed before their physical form. Where our theory has a foundation in the science of physics, as the language with which we understand our reality, from our physical perspective outward, this other theory might put the physical realm beneath the realm of consciousnesses, where the ones holding to the theory originated. It seems that these scales would need to balance as well, and find agreement to the state of reality after the victor is crowned, as each entity references the same reality with their version of the complete theory, seen through different lenses.