IIRC, ToE not possible, per Goedel

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter mister studebaker
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Per Toe
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the implications of Gödel's incompleteness theorem in relation to the completeness of mathematical systems used in physics. Gödel's theorem indicates that proof systems capable of proving arithmetic, such as second-order propositional calculus and Zermelo-Fraenkel (ZF) axioms, are either undecidable or incomplete. However, it is established that mathematical systems not based on these proof systems, such as Tarski's complete geometry and recent advancements in real number operations, may not face Gödel's limitations. Consequently, physics does not necessarily encounter Gödel problems as it utilizes a selective subset of mathematics, aiming for simplicity rather than completeness.

PREREQUISITES
  • Gödel's incompleteness theorem
  • Second-order propositional calculus
  • Zermelo-Fraenkel (ZF) axioms
  • Tarski's completeness in geometry
NEXT STEPS
  • Explore Gödel's incompleteness theorem in detail
  • Study the implications of second-order propositional calculus
  • Investigate Tarski's work on completeness in geometry
  • Research the recent advancements in the completeness of operations with real numbers
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, physicists, and philosophers interested in the foundations of mathematics and its application in physics will benefit from this discussion.

mister studebaker
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
If one is seeking to explain everything, doesn't one run up against Goedel's incompleteness theorem?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Goedel's theorem concerns proof systems that are rich enough to prove arithmetic. Second order propositional calculus is such a proof system, and any system that contains it, such as the popular ZF axioms of set theory, is either undecidable or incomplete, by Goedel's theorem or its successors.

But any mathematical system than does not base itself on such a proof system is not necessarily undecidable or incomplete. Tarski showed that geometry is complete back in 1948, and work in the last ten years or so has shown that a broad class of operations with real numbers is complete, too. So it's not a foregone conclusion that the math of physics will run into Goedel problems.
 
Physics in not an attempt to prove the completeness of mathematics. Nor has it been proven that you even need a complete math system to prove the completeness of physics. Physics is deliberately using only a subset of math since it's an effort to reduce all things to a brief formula, it does not require every valid mathematical formula for its completeness.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
4K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K