As an approach to a Theory of Everything a framework for developing a coherent theory of mathematics and physics together is described. The main characteristic of such a theory is discussed: the theory must be valid and and sufficiently strong, and it must maximally describe its own validity and sufficient strength. The mathematical logical definition of validity is used, and sufficient strength is seen to be a necessary and useful concept. The requirement of maximal description of its own validity and (...) sufficient strength may be useful to reject candidate coherent theories for which the description is less than maximal. Other aspects of a coherent theory discussed include universal applicability, the relation to the anthropic principle, and possible uniqueness. It is suggested that the basic properties of the physical and mathematical universes are entwined with and emerge with a coherent theory. Support for this includes the indirect reality status of properties of very small or very large far away systems compared to moderate sized nearby systems. Discussion of the necessary physical nature of language includes physical models of language and a proof that the meaning content of expressions of any axiomatizable theory seems to be independent of the algorithmic complexity of the theory. Gödel maps seem to be less useful for a coherent theory than for purely mathematical theories because all symbols and words of any language must have representations as states of physical systems already in the domain of a coherent theory. (shrink)

The problem of how mathematics and physics are related at a foundational level is of interest. The approach taken here is to work towards a coherent theory of physics and mathematics together by examining the theory experiment connection. The role of an implied theory hierarchy and use of computers in comparing theory and experiment is described. The main idea of the paper is to tighten the theory experiment connection by bringing physical theories, as mathematical structures over C, the complex numbers, (...) closer to what is actually done in experimental measurements and computations. The method replaces C by C n which is the set of pairs, R n,I n, of n figure rational numbers in some basis. The properties of these numbers are based on those of numerical measurement outcomes for continuous variables. A model of space and time based on R n is discussed. The model is scale invariant with regions of constant step size interrupted by exponential jumps. A method of taking the limit n→∞ to obtain locally flat continuum-based space and time is outlined. Also R n based space is invariant under scale transformations. These correspond to expansion and contraction of space relative to a flat background. The location of the origin, which is a space and time singularity, does not change under these transformations. Some properties of quantum mechanics, based on C n and on R n space are briefly investigated. (shrink)

Three aspects of the Everett interpretation of quantum mechanics are considered. It is first shown that the proof of the metatheorem is not complete—thus it is an open question as to whether or not it is true. Next, some difficulties for the Everett interpretation and the metatheorem, which arise from consideration of the physics developed by observers in maverick universes, are discussed. Finally, it is shown that the universal state description of an ever-branching universe with each branch corresponding to a (...) possible perceived universe fails completely in the limit of an infinite number of successive branchings. (shrink)

In this work, quantum theories are considered which consist in essence of a map from state preparation proceduresw to states and a map from decision proceduresQ to probability operator measures. Two definitions of validity, similar to that given elsewhere, are given and compared for these theories. One definition is given in terms of one carrying out of somew followed by someQ, denoted by(Q, w). The other is given in terms of infinite repetitions(Q, w) ofw followed byQ. Both definitions are discussed (...) in terms of the comparison of limit empirical means with theoretical expectation values. Particular attention is given to the use of outcome sequences of(Q, w) and of(Q, w) to determine properties of the probability measures the physical theory assigns to each(Q, w) in its domain. (shrink)

It is shown that there exist observablesA and Borel setsE such that the procedure “measureA and give as output the number 1 (0) if theA measurement outcome is (is not) inE” does not correspond to a measurement of the proposition observable ℰA(E) usually assigned to such procedures. This result is discussed in terms of limitations on choice powers of observers.

The concept of randomness as applied to number sequences is important to the study of the relationship between the foundations of mathematics and physics. A reason is that while randomness is often defined in mathematical-logical terms, the only way one has to generate random number sequences is by means of repetitive physical processes. This paper will examine the question: What definition of randomness is correct in the sense of being the weakest allowable? Why this question is so important will become (...) clear during the course of the discussion.The main body of this paper is divided into three sections. Section 1. discusses the use of probability theory to describe various statistical processes and some of the alternative definitions of randomness that have been proposed.In Section 2. a criterion which a definition of randomness should satisfy is proposed. (shrink)