Abstract Can physical reality be fully captured by an algorithmic Theory of Everything? We argue not. Gödelian incompleteness shows that no sound, recursively axiomatizable formalism proves all truths of a sufficiently rich domain, while Tarskian undefinability shows that no such formalism defines its own truth predicate. This combined obstruction is not merely epistemic: undecidability in quantum logic, quantum measurement, and spectral gap problems demonstrates the existence of physically determinate questions that no algorithm can decide. We distinguish the Mental Lucas-Penrose (MLP) argument, concerning human cognition, from the Real Lucas-Penrose (RLP) argument introduced here, which transfers the Gödel-Tarski obstruction to the ontology of the physical world. Since truth for sufficiently rich domains is necessarily external, and spacetime is emergent from deeper formal structure, a non-algorithmic semantic layer prior to spacetime is required. Standard objections to MLP do not apply to RLP. A non-algorithmic truth principle is therefore foundational to physics.
We study a conditional model of ontological free will in which a pre-act state structures several coherent global continuations without intrinsically distinguishing one as the future actualisation. The topos-theoretic component is formalised by a choice sheaf and by the action of automorphisms preserving the pre-act da...
This article advances a categorial challenge to physicalistic versions of naturalized epistemology as an account of logico-mathematical knowledge and practice. It argues that, qua physically constituted, any putative rule-governed system is logico-mathematically indeterminate: physical facts are systematically insuffic...
Antonio Ramos-Díaz· Principia: An International...· 0 citations
Recent arguments in quantum gravity infer a need for a non-algorithmic metatheory from Godel incompleteness, while finite-information replies infer decidability from entropy bounds. We separate axiomatic completeness, dynamical reachability, observational interpretation, and physical tractability. Our main theorem-leve...
A. Budiyanto· International Journal of Mod...· 0 citations
Non-relativistic classical physics can be considered from a contextual perspective. At fi rst glance, the difference between classical physics (including special relativity) and quantum physics lies in the fact that the latter is indeterministic – that is, in general, the context of a quantum event cannot be controlled...
I. Pris· Siberian Journal of Philosop...· 0 citations