SRH fractal nature

Suppose we make a statement S that entails a distinction A and its necessary corollary B: in that anything which defines a region A also defines another inverse region B.

And suppose that this statement S is isomorphic with A. Then we can deduce that the corollary B is isomorphic with an unknown statement S'

Thus when a statement (or system) make a division, into which it itself maps, the statement can be used to make a distinction about itself.

Now is the "self" a problem?

Suppose that instead it wasn't S itself that was isomorphic but a statement T. Then the corollary would be T'.

T' may be a contradiction which is what we tend to look for in these situation.

But with S' it is more convoluted since S is the source of the distinction. So we are making a deduction about the statement upon which the deduction is based which is much more precarious.

It is this loop, the possibility of infinite regress, and of contradiction which makes self-reference so interesting.

Of course if T was the basis of S then we can generate the same thing. "self" must be taken to mean not direct but ultimately derived from.