(Work in Progress) The Experiments, as the Irreducible Basis of All Science, and the Observer, as the Probability Space of All Experiments, Are Found Sufficient to Entail All Physics
AbstractWhile there exists in the wild a process to derive the laws of physics ---namely, the practice of science--- such does not currently benefit from a purely formal construction. This lack necessarily leads to obscurities in the development of physics. It is our present purpose to formalize the process within a purely mathematical background that will eliminate these obscurities. The first step in the program will be to eliminate all ambiguities from our language. To do so, we will express arbitrary experiments using Turing complete languages and halting programs. A listing of such experiments is recursively enumerable and, if understood as an incremental contribution to knowledge, then serves as a formulation of mathematics that models the practice of science entirely. In turn this formulation leads to a definition of the observer as the probability space over all experiments in nature, and physics as the solution to an optimization problem on the production of a message from said space; interpreted, physics defines a circumscription on the participation of the observer in nature. Finally, we discuss our model of the observer and the relation to physics, in the context of a comprehensive theory of reality.
Similar books and articles
The Comprehensible Cosmos: Where Do the Laws of Physics Come From?Victor J. Stenger - 2006 - Prometheus Books.
Explanation of physical phenomena by laws of nature.Peter Mittelstaedt - 2012 - Epistemologia 2:234-246.
In defense of psychological laws.Martin Carrier - 1998 - International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 12 (3):217 – 232.
The fundamental laws of physics can tell the truth.Renat Nugayev - 1991 - International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 5 (1):79 – 87.
Physics and the problem of historico-sociological laws.Edgar Zilsel - 1941 - Philosophy of Science 8 (4):567-579.
The Status of Laws of Nature in the Philosophy of Leibniz.Karen R. Zwier - 2011 - Proceedings of the American Catholic Philosophical Association 85:149-160.
Why Physics is not Wrong on Temporal Directionality, and Why This is not Necessarily Good News for Physicalism.Yuval Dolev - 2022 - Foundations of Science 27 (4):1285-1300.
Laws, symmetry, and symmetry breaking: Invariance, conservation principles, and objectivity.John Earman - 2004 - Philosophy of Science 71 (5):1227--1241.
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads
Citations of this work
No citations found.