Journal of Holography Applications in Physics

Discussion on the Faizal-Krauss-Shabir-Marino Argument about the Theory of Everything

Document Type : Letter

Authors

1 Irving K. Barber School of Arts and Sciences, University of British Columbia Okanagan, Kelowna, British Columbia V1V 1V7, Canada; Canadian Quantum Research Center, 204-3002 32 Ave, Vernon, BC V1T 2L7, Canada; Department of Mathematical Sciences, Durham University, Upper Mountjoy, Stockton Road, Durham DH1 3LE, UK; Faculty of Sciences, Hasselt University, Agoralaan Gebouw D, Diepenbeek, 3590, Belgium;

2 Origin Project Foundation, Phoenix, AZ 85018, USA

3 Canadian Quantum Research Center, 204-3002 32 Ave, Vernon, BC V1T 2L7, Canada

4 CNR-Istituto Nazionale di Ottica and INFN, Via Sansone 1, I-50019 Sesto Fiorentino (FI), Italy

Abstract

We clarify that we present a non-anthropocentric framework in which nature itself instantiates both algorithmic and non-algorithmic truths. While computable structures such as solutions of the Einstein equations are realized independently of human description, we argue that G\"odelian non-algorithmic truths are likewise objectively actualized in physical reality. Although the Lucas-Penrose argument is superficially similar, it concerns the nature of human consciousness, whereas our claim is fundamentally different in scope. We apply this reasoning to the structure of reality itself, independent of human consciousness. Consequently, objections based on the possible inconsistency of human reasoning are not applicable here, since assuming nature itself to be inconsistent is not tenable, as it would collapse the distinction between true and false physical claims.

Keywords

Main Subjects

 

Article PDF

[1] M. Faizal, L. M. Krauss, A. Shabir, and F. Marino, “Consequences of Undecidability in Physics on the Theory of Everything,” JHAP 5(2), 10 (2025). DOI: https://doi.org/10.22128/jhap.2025.1024.1118
[2] M. Faizal, L. M. Krauss, A. Shabir, F. Marino, and B. Pourhassan, “Can quantum gravity be both consistent and complete?,” Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 34(16), 2544017 (2025). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1142/S0218271825440171
[3] K. Gödel, “Über formal unentscheidbare sätze der principia mathematica und verwandter systeme I,” Monatshefte für Mathematik und Physik 38, 173 (1931). DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF01700692
[4] J. R. Lucas, “Minds, machines and gödel,” Philosophy 36(137), 112 (1961). DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0031819100057983
[5] S. R. Penrose, M. Gardner, “The Emperor’s New Mind: Concerning Computers, Minds, and The Laws of Physics,” Oxford University Press (1989). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198519737.001.0001
[6] R. Penrose, “Shadows of the Mind: A Searchfor the Missing Science of Consciousness”, Oxford University Press (1996). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780195106466.001.0001
[7] A. M. Turing, “On computable numbers, with an application to the entscheidungsproblem,” Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society s2-42(1), 230 (1937). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1112/plms/s2-42.1.230
[8] G. J. Chaitin, “Information-theoretic limitations of formal systems,” Journal of the ACM 21, 403 (1974). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1142/9789814434058_0015
[9] S. Feferman, “Penrose’s Gödelian argument,” Psyche 2(7), 21 (1995). DOI: http://psyche.cs.monash.edu.au/v2/psyche-2-07-feferman.html
[10] S. Shapiro, “Incompleteness, mechanism, and optimism,” Bulletin of Symbolic Logic 4(3), 273 (1998). DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/421032
[11] G. LaForte, P. J. Hayes, and K. M. Ford, “Why gödel’s theorem cannot refute computationalism,’ Artificial Intelligence 104(1), 265 (1998). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0004-3702(98)00052-6
[12] R. Penrose, “Beyond the doubting of a shadow a reply to commentaries on shadows of the mind,” PSYCHE: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Research On Consciousness 2 (1995). DOI: http://psyche.cs.monash.edu.au/v2/psyche-2-23-penrose.html
[13] A. K. Khan, “Discussion on the faizal-krauss-shabir-marino argument about the theory of everything,” Journal of Holography Applications in Physics 6(1), 126 (2026). DOI: 10.22128/jhap.2025.3160.1166
[14] A. Tarski, “Der wahrheitsbegriff in den formalisierten sprachen,” in Logik-Texte: Kommentierte Auswahl zur Geschichte der modernen Logik, pp. 445–546. De Gruyter, Berlin, Boston, (1986). DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/9783112645826-016
[15] S. Hameroff and R. Penrose, “Consciousness in the universe: A review of the ‘orch or’ theory,” Physics of Life Reviews 11(1), 39 (2014). DOI: http://dx.doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plrev.2013.08.002
[16] H. P. Stapp, “The importance of quantum decoherence in brain processes,” DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.quant-ph/0010029
[17] S. Hagan, S. R. Hameroff, and J. A. Tuszyński, “Quantum computation in brain microtubules: Decoherence and biological feasibility,” Phys. Rev. E 65, 061901 (2002). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.65.061901
[18] G. L. Celardo, M. Angeli, T. J. A. Craddock, and P. Kurian, “On the existence of superradiant excitonic states in microtubules,’ New Journal of Physics 21(2), 023005 (2019). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1088/1367-2630/aaf839
[19] N. S. Babcock et al., “Ultraviolet Superradiance from Mega-Networks of Tryptophan in Biological Architectures,” J. Phys. Chem. B 128(17), 4035 (2024). DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/acs.jpcb.3c07936
[20] A. P. Kalra, A. Benny, S. M. Travis, et al., “Electronic energy migration in microtubules,” ACS Central Science 9, 352 (2023). DOI: http://dx.doi.org/http://doi.org/10.1021/acscentsci.2c01114
[21] K. Saxena et al., “Fractal, scale free electromagnetic resonance of a single brain extracted microtubule nanowire, a single tubulin protein and a single neuron,” Fractal and Fractiona 4(2), (2020). DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/fractalfract4020011
[22] J. Eisert, M. P. Müller, and C. Gogolin, “Quantum measurement occurrence is undecidable,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 260501 (2012). DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.108.260501
[23] T. Fritz, “Quantum logic is undecidable,” Archive for Mathematical Logic 60(3-4), 329 (2021). DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00153-020-00749-0
[24] E. P. Wigner, “Remarks on the mind-body question,” in Philosophical Reflections and Syntheses, J. Mehra, ed., vol. B/6 of The Collected Works of Eugene Paul Wigner, Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, (1995). DOI:  https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-642-78374-6_20
[25] J. von Neumann, “Mathematische Grundlagen der Quantenmechanik”, Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, (1932). DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-61409-5
[26] T. Cubitt, D. Perez-Garcia, and M. Wolf, “Undecidability of the spectral gap,” Nature 528, 207 (2015). DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nature16059
[27] Á. Perales-Eceiza, T. Cubitt, M. Gu, D. Pérez-García, and M. M. Wolf, “Undecidability in physics: A review,” Phys. Rept. 1138, 1 (2025). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physrep.2025.06.004 
Journal of Holography Applications in Physics
Volume 6, Issue 2
January 2026
Pages 119-124
  • Receive Date: 26 December 2025
  • Revise Date: 30 January 2026
  • Accept Date: 25 January 2026