Discussion on Consequences of Undecidability in Physics on the Theory of Everything

Document Type : Letter

Author

Zhejiang Engineering Research Center of Micro/Nano-Photonic/Electronic System Integration, Westlake University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang 310030, China; Department of Electronic and Information Engineering, School of Engineering, Westlake University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang 310030, China

Abstract

This paper discusses the 2025 study by Faizal et al. (published in the Journal of Holographic Applied Physics, Volume 5, Issue 2, Pages 10–21). It fully endorses the core conclusions put forward in the original work: purely algorithmic frameworks (such as algorithmic quantum gravity, FQG) are inadequate for formulating a Theory of Everything (ToE), as supported by the theoretical foundations of Gödel, Tarski, and Chaitin; the "Meta-Theory of Everything" (MToE) provides an effective solution to address undecidable phenomena in physics; and the universe cannot be a product of simulation. However, this paper dissents from the original authors' pursuit of a "complete and consistent" effective theory. Given that completeness and consistency are sometimes mutually exclusive in nature, it advocates for a reframing of the MToE. The revised framework should prioritize logical consistency while explicitly abandoning the unattainable requirement of completeness.

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”, Journal of Holographic Applied Physics 5, 10 (2025).
[2] I. Prigogine, “The End of Certainty: Time, Chaos, and the New Laws of Nature”, Free Press, (1997).
[3] S. Lloyd, “Programming the Universe: A Quantum Computer Scientist Takes on the Cosmos”. Knopf, (2006).
[4] W. C. Cui, R. Li, and L. L. Pan, “Toward a Unified Theory for Complex Systems”, European Journal of Applied Sciences, 12(5), 69 (2024). DOI: 10.14738/aivp.125.17556
[5] W.C. Cui, R. Li, and L. L. Pan, “Unified Complex Systems Theory (UCST): Resolving Materialist Dilemmas Through Dualist Ontology and Active Force”, European Journal of Applied Sciences, 13(5), 517 (2025). DOI:10.14738/aivp.1305.19511
[6] K. Gödel, “Über die Vollständigkeit des Logikkalküls”, Doctoral dissertation, University Of Vienna, (1929).
[7] K. Gödel, “About formally undecidable sentences of the Principia Mathematica and related systems I”, Monthly Magazines for Mathematics and Physics, 38, 173 (1931).
[8] 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), 2544017 (2025). DOI: 10.1142/S0218271825440171
[9] A. Einstein, B. Podolsky, and N. Rosen, “Can quantum-mechanical description of physical reality be considered complete?”, Physical Review, 47, 777 (1935).
[10] N. Bohr, “Can quantum-mechanical description of physical reality be considered complete?” Physical Review, 48, 696 (1935).
[11] A. Whitaker, “Einstein, Bohr and the Quantum Dilemma—From Quantum Theory to Quantum Information (2nd ed.)”, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, (2006).
[12] R. Fitzpatrick, Quantum Mechanics, Singapore: World Scientific, (2015).
[13] X. Oriols, and J. Mompart, “Applied Bohmian Mechanics: From Nanoscale Systems to Cosmology (2nd ed.)”, Singapore: Jenny Stanford Publishing Pte. Ltd., (2019).
[14] B. Misra, and E. C. G. Sudarshan, “The Zeno’s Paradox in Quantum Theory”, Journal of Mathematical Physics, 18(4), 756 (1977). DOI: 10.1063/1.523304
[15] M. C. Fischer, B. Gutiérrez-Medina, and M. G. Raizen, “Observation of the Quantum Zeno and Anti-Zeno Effects in an Unstable System”, Physical Review Letters, 87(4), 040402 (2001). DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.87.040402
[16] D. Frauchiger, and R. Renner, “Quantum theory cannot consistently describe the use of itself”, Nature Communications, 9(1), 3711 (2018). DOI: 10.1038/s41467-018-05739-8
[17] Z. Minev, S. Mundhada, S. Shankar, and et al., “To catch and reverse a quantum jump mid-flight”, Nature, 570, 200 (2019). DOI: 10.1038/s41586-019-1287-z
[18] V. Sharoglazova, M. Puplauskis, C. Mattschas, and et al., “Energy–speed relationship of quantum particles challenges Bohmian mechanics”, Nature, 643, 67 (2025). DOI: 10.1038/s41586-025-09099-4
[19] L. Smolin, “The Trouble with Physics: The Rise of String Theory, the Fall of a Science, and What Comes Next”, Mariner Books, (2007).
[20] P. Woit, “Not Even Wrong: The Failure of String Theory and the Continuing Challenge to Unify the Laws of Physics”, Basic Books, (2007).
Volume 6, Issue 2
January 2026
Pages 125-131
  • Receive Date: 06 November 2025
  • Revise Date: 31 December 2025
  • Accept Date: 31 December 2025