Hello, /sci/. I claim to have developed a unique skill that's proving difficult to properly replicate. Part of the reason for this is due to the nature of its mathematical construction.

I suppose the most obvious thing to do is start with my reasoning.

I've been studying magic. All forms of that I can find. No model is rejected up front, and if it can be explained in terms of another model then I take neither as precedent over the other. The simple case of "magic as it occurs in fictional worlds" does not remain simple upon complex analysis because the general purpose of magic is to bring the content of our minds into the world. Each model had to be examined in its own context with no regard for its nature as an imaginary (fictional) construct.

After awhile I began to notice that the magic we want to be real (what we express in fictional worlds) is often grandiose, imaginative without necessarily being functional. Meant to bring awe and wonder, but not so much else. Since it doesn't really have a name, we'll be referring to it as "high concept" fantasy magic to differentiate it from whatever forms of magic may be possible in our world. While it's true that I cannot yet falsify the "it's possible, we just lack the skill" hypothesis for these types of magic, it would also set us back to not classify out the forms of magic that none of us can do.

The problem with my models of possible forms of real world magic is that they do not converge. What I mean by this is, if they were convergent, then we could, through an intelligent series of experiments, deduce the correct model of magic in our world. Chi based models seemed logical at first, but other models that have claimed result don't seem to reflect the same properties, so my natural thought was to construct a higher model that would explain all of the relevant submodels. This seemed rational until an unexpected event that's left me somewhat baffled. Now, it seems there is no limit on modeling complexity for magic.