"Not exactly.  Counting lost 3s will also work.  Or counting lost 5s.  But that just scales the number of points you win.  There's around nineteen twelfths of a 2 in a 3, so if you know how many 3s you lost, you can convert to how many 2s you lost.  It's not so much that there's only one function, as that all the functions like that, are basically doing the same thing and have outputs that are trivial to convert back and forth."

"Not exactly.  Counting lost 3s will also work.  Or counting lost 5s.  But that just scales the number of points you win.  There's around nineteen twelfths of a 2 in a 3, so if you know how many 3s you lost, you can convert to how many 2s you lost.  It's not so much that there's only one function, as that all the functions like that, are basically doing the same thing and have outputs that are trivial to convert back and forth."

"The Law, in this case, is not an exact function or an exact number of points, it's a structure such that every solution shares that structure and does almost exactly the same thing."

"Not exactly.  Counting lost 3s will also work.  Or counting lost 5s.  But that just scales the number of points you win.  There's around nineteen twelfths of a 2 in a 3, so if you know how many 3s you lost, you can convert to how many 2s you lost.  It's not so much that there's only one function, as that all the functions like that, are basically doing the same thing and have outputs that are trivial to convert back and forth."

"The Law, in this case, is not an exact function or an exact number of points, it's a structure such that every solution shares that structure and does almost exactly the same thing.  Like a simpler and clearer version of the way that lots of logics are ultimately equivalent to first-order logic in what they end up deriving."