If it is true that there is a book contains everything that’s true, it logically follows that the book must contain itself. Now if it is true that the book contains itself, then the book must contain a book that contains itself. Now if this is true, then the book must contain a book… and we’ve got an infinite regress. Such a book couldn’t fit in between the covers of a finite book and by the statement in panel 2, it must be forgotten. Therefore, the book that contains everything that’s true must not contain anything (as it was forgotten due to the infinite regress). But that contradicts the statement that the book contains everything that is true. Welcome to set theory and Russell’s paradox.
If it is true that there is a book contains everything that’s true, it logically follows that the book must contain itself. Now if it is true that the book contains itself, then the book must contain a book that contains itself. Now if this is true, then the book must contain a book… and we’ve got an infinite regress. Such a book couldn’t fit in between the covers of a finite book and by the statement in panel 2, it must be forgotten. Therefore, the book that contains everything that’s true must not contain anything (as it was forgotten due to the infinite regress). But that contradicts the statement that the book contains everything that is true. Welcome to set theory and Russell’s paradox.