diff --git a/Proof_of_OI.md b/Proof_of_OI.md
deleted file mode 100644
index eb07629..0000000
--- a/Proof_of_OI.md
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,115 +0,0 @@
-# Formal Proof: Open Individualism Necessarily Follows from EMR and PSR
-
-## Front Matter
-
-### Definitions
-
-- **Open Individualism (OI):** The metaphysical view that there is only one subject of experience — all conscious beings, across all space, time, and modality, are numerically the same experiencer.
-
-- **Closed Individualism (CI):** The view that each person is a separate, distinct subject of experience. You are only your body and not anyone else.
-
-- **Empty Individualism (EI):** The view that each moment of consciousness is a distinct experiencer. There is no enduring self — only a sequence of isolated experiential events.
-
-- **Extended Modal Realism (EMR):** The metaphysical view that all possible, impossible, and even incoherent worlds exist. Modal existence is total — nothing is arbitrarily excluded.
-
-- **Principle of Sufficient Reason (PSR):** The principle that every fact must have a sufficient, non-arbitrary reason for why it is so and not otherwise. This includes identity facts.
-
----
-
-## Assumptions
-
-- EMR is true: all minds in all forms exist across all modal realities.
-- PSR is true: no fact, including personal identity, can be brute or arbitrary.
-- We are not attempting to prove EMR or PSR in this document — only what follows from them.
-
----
-
-## Step-by-Step Proof
-
-### Step 1: EMR implies that all minds — including identical and near-identical ones — exist.
-
-- There exist minds in different bodies and worlds that are phenomenally identical to your own.
-- Some of these duplicates are exact copies; others differ by small degrees.
-
-### Step 2: PSR requires that distinctions between minds have sufficient reason.
-
-- If two minds are phenomenally and structurally identical, there can be no non-arbitrary basis to say one is “you” and the other is not.
-- Any attempt to do so would violate PSR by positing an unexplained identity difference.
-
-### Step 3: Therefore, identical conscious states must correspond to the same subject.
-
-- The “you” experiencing Mind A must also be the “you” experiencing Mind B if there is no reason to distinguish them.
-- The only non-arbitrary solution is numerical identity of subject across instantiations.
-
-### Step 4: This principle generalizes to all minds.
-
-- Minds form a continuum across all modal realities.
-- If two minds differ, they do so gradually and by degree — but boundaries between “subjects” remain arbitrary unless grounded.
-- PSR disallows such brute boundary-making.
-
-### Step 5: Therefore, Open Individualism is the only theory of identity compatible with EMR and PSR.
-
-- CI fails because it posits brute separateness.
-- EI fails because it posits brute fragmentation of subjecthood at every moment.
-- OI alone requires no brute distinctions in assigning subjective identity.
-
-✅ **Q.E.D.**
-
----
-
-## Rejection of Competing Theories
-
-### ❌ Closed Individualism (CI)
-
-- Treats each body as a separate subject.
-- Under EMR, there are many identical bodies and minds — yet only one “you.”
-- Assigning “you” to only one version is arbitrary unless justified.
-- CI therefore violates PSR.
-
-### ❌ Empty Individualism (EI)
-
-- Treats each moment of experience as a distinct subject.
-- Fails to account for continuity of experience — treats successive moments as fundamentally unconnected.
-- Introduces brute numerical identity distinctions across time with no justification.
-- EI therefore violates PSR.
-
----
-
-## Rebuttals to Common Objections
-
-### Objection 1: “I only feel like I am this body — not all others.”
-
-**Response:**  
-This is an epistemic limitation, not a metaphysical one. You don’t feel your past self directly either, but you still consider it to be “you.” Introspective feeling does not justify metaphysical distinctness.
-
----
-
-### Objection 2: “It’s absurd to say I am everyone.”
-
-**Response:**  
-Absurdity is not the same as incoherence. The conclusion may be counterintuitive, but it is logically required by EMR + PSR. Rejecting it requires accepting brute facts, which violates PSR.
-
----
-
-### Objection 3: “But different minds have different thoughts and experiences — how can they be one?”
-
-**Response:**  
-Differences in experience do not imply differences in the experiencer. A single subject can undergo varying states without fragmenting into multiple subjects. Just as you are still “you” when you wake up with different thoughts than yesterday.
-
----
-
-### Objection 4: “Personal identity must be tied to physical continuity.”
-
-**Response:**  
-This is a physicalist assumption that cannot account for modal duplicates. In EMR, there are exact replicas with no causal link to “your” body. Without PSR-justified boundaries, physical continuity cannot ground unique subjecthood.
-
----
-
-## Conclusion
-
-- EMR ensures that all minds — including duplicates and variants — exist.
-- PSR ensures that distinctions between them must be non-arbitrary and justified.
-- Only Open Individualism avoids brute identity facts and fully satisfies both.
-- Therefore, Open Individualism is necessarily true given EMR and PSR.
-
-✅ **Final Conclusion: OI is the only metaphysically coherent theory of personal identity under EMR and PSR.**