Hilbert's Sixth Problem: Can Physics Be Completely Axiomatized?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Austen Bentley
  • Start date Start date
Austen Bentley
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
( note ⊕ is the mutually exclusive or ) First note trivially an axiomatiziation of physics would be complete as (\forall \phi( \phi \in L)) s.t.L ↔(the language of the formal axiomatization of physics) the statement ϕwould be an arbitrary statement of some physical property or event etc and thus by the definition of the axiom system one should be able to prove \phi \oplus \neg \phi .

If one assumes it is possible to axiomatize physics completely (a correct solution to Hilbert's sixth problem) could one then use Godels incompleteness theorem to prove that there are some parts of the physical universe that we can never truly understand(prove from this purportedly complete axiom system) thus contradicting the statement that the axiomatization is complete thus proving (informally) a negative solution to hilberts sixth problem? (One assumes the complexity of the axiom system is strong enough to prove basic arithmetic properties as required by the incompleteness theorem.)

Wouldn't this also prove the "thery of everything impossible as well, as it could be treated as an axiom system (even if it is a single equation, as it could be a single axiom) and algebraic manipulations would be derivations from (theorems of) the axiom system and thus by godels incompleteness theorem would also be incomplete and thus not truly a "theory of everything" as there exist physical phenomena that could not be proven or disproven within the system(or both and thus is inconsistent ).

Discuss
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
What is your interest in Hilberts sixth problem? Are you working on a homework paper? Or is this just basic curiosity?

For starters

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hilbert's_sixth_problem

From the wiki article there's no mention of completeness only the axiomization of physics. So it seems that Godels theorem would only apply once we had all the axioms and then it would mean that there exists some things which are just undecidable in the system using those axioms.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gödel's_incompleteness_theorems

Here's some more discussion about the two

http://physics.stackexchange.com/qu...h-problem-the-axiomatization-of-physics-after
 
Hi all, I've been a roulette player for more than 10 years (although I took time off here and there) and it's only now that I'm trying to understand the physics of the game. Basically my strategy in roulette is to divide the wheel roughly into two halves (let's call them A and B). My theory is that in roulette there will invariably be variance. In other words, if A comes up 5 times in a row, B will be due to come up soon. However I have been proven wrong many times, and I have seen some...
Namaste & G'day Postulate: A strongly-knit team wins on average over a less knit one Fundamentals: - Two teams face off with 4 players each - A polo team consists of players that each have assigned to them a measure of their ability (called a "Handicap" - 10 is highest, -2 lowest) I attempted to measure close-knitness of a team in terms of standard deviation (SD) of handicaps of the players. Failure: It turns out that, more often than, a team with a higher SD wins. In my language, that...
Back
Top