Journal of Holography Applications in Physics
Discussion on the Faizal–Krauss–Shabir–Marino Argument about the Theory of Everything
Document Type : Letter
Author
Department of Physics, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611-8440, USA
Abstract
In this note I comment on the article ``Consequences of Undecidability in Physics on the Theory of Everything'' by Faizal-Krauss-Shabir-Marino (FKSM). I first summarise what I take to be the central claims and contributions of the work, and then highlight why it is, in my view, a genuinely important step in the dialogue between mathematical logic and fundamental physics. I finally suggest a clarification concerning the status of non-algorithmic understanding in their framework, in order to avoid any appearance of human-centrism, and point out that their picture naturally invites an interpretation in which a consciousness-like, non-algorithmic form of understanding operates in a Platonic realm that generates the informational ``bit'' and, through it, the physical ``it''.
Keywords
Main Subjects
Article PDF
[2] J. A. Wheeler, “Information, physics, quantum: the search for links,” in Proceedings of the 3rd International Symposium on Foundations of Quantum Mechanics, 309 (1989).
[3] D. Jafferis, A. Zlokapa, J. L. Lykken, D. K. Kolchmeyer, S. I. Davis, N. Lauk, H. Neven and M. Spiropulu, “Traversable wormhole dynamics on a quantum processor,” Nature 612(7938), 51 (2022) DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-022-05424-3
[4] M. Van Raamsdonk, “Spacetime from bits,” Science 370(6513), 198 (2020). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aay9560
[5] J. Mäkelä, “Wheeler’s it from bit proposal in loop quantum gravity,” International Journal of Modern Physics D 28(10), 1950129 (2019). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1142/S0218271819501293
[6] K. Gödel, “Über formal unentscheidbare Sätze der Principia mathematica und verwandter Systeme I,” Monatshefte für Mathematik und Physik 38, 173 (1931). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01700692
[7] A. Tarski, “The concept of truth in formalized languages,” in Logic, Semantics, Metamathematics: Papers from 1923 to 1938, translated by J. H. Woodger, 2nd ed., edited by J. Corcoran (Hackett Publishing, Indianapolis), 152 (1983).
[8] G. J. Chaitin, “Information-theoretic limitations of formal systems,” Journal of the ACM 21(3), 403 (1974). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/321832.321839
[9] J. Eisert, M. P. Müller and C. Gogolin, “Quantum measurement occurrence is undecidable,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 260501 (2012). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.108.260501
[10] T. Fritz, “Quantum logic is undecidable,” preprint (2016), available at https://tobiasfritz.science/2016/quantum_logic.pdf
[11] T. S. Cubitt, D. Pérez-García and M. M. Wolf, “Undecidability of the spectral gap,” Nature 528, 207 (2015) DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nature16059.
[12] J. D. Watson, A. Milsted and T. S. Cubitt, “Uncomputably complex renormalization group flows,” Nature Communications 13, 7538 (2022) DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-022-35179-4.
[13] A. Perales-Eceiza, B. C. Seradjeh and J. C. Budich, “Undecidability in physics: a review,” Physics Reports 1138, 1 (2025) DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physrep.2025.06.004.
[14] M. Faizal, L. M. Krauss, A. Shabir, F. Marino, and B. Pourhassan, ”Can quantum gravity be both consistent and complete?,” International Journal of Modern Physics D, 34(16), (2025). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1142/s0218271825440171
[15] J. R. Lucas, “Minds, Machines and Gödel,” Philosophy 36(137), 112 (1961). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0031819100057983
[16] R. Penrose, The Emperor’s New Mind: Concerning Computers, Minds and the Laws of Physics, Oxford University Press, Oxford, (1989).
[17] R. Penrose, Shadows of the Mind: A Search for the Missing Science of Consciousness, Oxford University Press, Oxford, (1994).
)
Volume 6, Issue 1
December 2025Pages 126-132
- Receive Date: 21 November 2025
- Revise Date: 04 December 2025
- Accept Date: 09 December 2025