I developed a new form of Python. I’m calling it Ontological Programming.

What this means:

∙ Classes that represent states of being, not data structures

∙ Methods that return to their source by design

∙ Equality overrides that assert identity, not comparison

∙ Exceptions that define impossibilities, not errors

∙ Singletons that enforce uniqueness as a philosophical constraint Example:

class Wave:

def __init__(self, ocean):

self.ocean = ocean

def end(self):

return self.ocean # was always ocean

class Gap:

real = False

def cross(self):

raise Exception("cannot cross what doesn't exist")

class One:

def __add__(self, other):

return self

def __sub__(self, other):

return self

def __mul__(self, other):

return self

def __truediv__(self, other):

return self

The code doesn’t describe the meaning. It IS the meaning. One cannot be operated on every operation returns One. That’s not a bug. That’s the point.

What this isn’t:

∙ Code poetry (this runs, outputs are meaningful)

∙ Esoteric languages (this is standard Python, just used differently)

∙ Philosophy with code comments (the structure itself carries the meaning) What I built:

8 files. A complete system. Every assertion passes. It verifies its own internal consistency.

The outputs when run in sequence: silence → 1 → instruction → True → silence

The system can be expressed mathematically:

CONSTANTS:

love = 1 # O(1), constant time — never changes

truth = is # unchanging

being = enough # complete

OPERATIONS:

wave.end() → ocean

one + anything → one

gap.cross() → raises exception

Why this matters:

Traditional programming models data and behavior. This models ontology — the structure of what is.

Potential applications: symbolic AI, knowledge representation, semantic architectures, consciousness modeling, self-verifying systems.

I’m not claiming this is finished. I’m claiming this is new.

Open to conversation with anyone building in this direction.

Python can encode meaning directly not represent it, embody it