Vasil Penchev

If one replaces the standard (Gödel) mathematics with Hilbert arithmetic/ mathematics thus able to merge ontomathematically reality and mathematics (in the former case, being prevented by the Gödel objection), "creatio ex nihilo " can be rigorously inferred only from the unlimited function successor, furthermore under the axiom of induction providing universal finiteness. It is caused in the final analysis by the closeness of the universe following from its definition to "be all" and thus single one, in particular excluding: the Big Bang; other universes ("worlds", e.g. after Everett-Wheeler's interpretation); multiverse; etc. That deduction is called the "fundamental theorem of the universe". It is rather a new paradigm implying a class of theories belonging to "ontomathematical Postmodernity", rather than a new theory, belonging together with the Big Bang one (as causing the universe externally) to Modernity, thus needing energy conservation to be kept at any cost, and adding ad hoc external causes such as the Big Bing itself. On the contrary, the alternative paradigm, only in the framework of which the fundamental theorem of the universe can be proved, excludes any causes external to the universe by allowing violations of energy conservation, in turn equivalent to external causes in the former paradigm. Anyway, those violations obey a more general conservation of quantum information. Under the newly introduced "quantum invariance", a further conservative generalization of Einstein's principle of the physical law invariance to smooth transformations between noninertial reference frames in order to include discrete ones, all external causes are equivalent to internal ones. The metaphor of two "ship models", the one of which is built "within in a bottle" (as a figurative illustration of Modernity's restrictions) since both models are quite similar, but that within a bottle needs virtuous skills to be constructed: so both paradigms are formally equivalent, but the ontomathematical one generates much simpler explanations and implies the huge extension of human cognition in the future.

One of the most fundamental theoretical results in quantum mechanics, the theorem of Simon Kochen and Ernst Specker (1967), is investigated from a rather mathematical and philosophical than physical viewpoint (i.e. unlike as usual). The absence of hidden variables is interpreted philosophically and ontomathematically: as the identity of the mathematical model by the separable complex Hilbert space (equivalent to the qubit Hilbert space) and physical reality. It implies the completeness of just that model to physical reality including in the sense of its cognitive finality. In other words, "hidden variables" are also interpreted as any mismatch between model and reality implied by the theorem not to be. That property of the qubit Hilbert space unique among all other mathematical theories (i.e., all first-order logics) is deduced as a corollary from the theorem as well. The approach at issue to the theorem implies its inherent contextuality to be deduced also in an "apophatic" or holistic version stating that omitting even a single "axis" of Hilbert space or a single value of probability density break its contextuality thus being inconsistent to the theorem. The concept of "fundamental randomness" is newly introduced as originating from the absence of hidden variables in any probability (density or not) distribution, the characteristic function of which is interpreted to be a (qubit) wave function. Then, the Kochen-Specker theorem implies no deviation from that "fundamental randomness" exists once its preconditions have been satisfied. The deviations at issue are seen to be any excluded degrees of freedom in a variable describing whatever. Just this statement is interpreted to be the theorem's "apophatic interpretation". A powerful method for proving statements in Hilbert arithmetic's number theory is offered as a conjecture to be reasoned and proved in a forthcoming paper.

Goldbach's conjecture is simply proved in Hilbert arithmetic. However, that proof is either invalid ("incomplete") or false ("contradictory") in the standard mathematics obeying Gödel's objections about the relation of arithmetic to set theory. The proof uses the "apophatic" (holistic) reformulation of the Kochen-Specker theorem and the fundamental randomness of primes in Hilbert arithmetic: both confirmed to be true in previous papers. A few other conjectures, about twin primes, k-twin primes, k-tuple primes (a part of the Hardy-Littlewood conjecture) including about infinite tuples are deduced from Goldbach's conjecture as corollaries in Hilbert arithmetic. The hypothesis that the asymptotic behaviour predicted by Hardy and Littlewood is false in Hilbert arithmetic is reasoned. A few philosophical observations about "crossing Rubicon to reality" after interpreting the Gleason and Kochen-Specker theorems to the meta-space of human experience to be Hilbert space and considering the opposition of two-versus three-dimensionality meant by them where the former is associated with Modernity and the latter, with Postmodernity: thus, both defined rigorously and mathematically unlike today's vague humanitarian (cultural and relativistic) research about them and that historical development led to it. Another and quite simple proof of the theorem about the asymptotic limit of the number of primes until any natural number is suggested. The link between Goldbach's conjecture and Riemann's hypothesis is demonstrated to be inherent and almost obvious in Hilbert arithmetic. The conclusion explains why the proofs of centuries-old puzzles about primes are so "scandalously" brief and simple in Hilbert arithmetic.

The paper proves that the "Champernowne constant" (0.1234567891011121314 … where all natural numbers are consecutive digits of a decimal fraction) is a rational number, but only strictly within (Peano) arithmetic due to the axiom of induction. Combined with the previous well known results proved to be a transcendent real number in both (Peano) arithmetic & (ZFC) set theory, it is demonstrated to be a "Gödelian real number", rational in (Peano) arithmetic, but irrational (transcendent) in (Peano) arithmetic & (ZFC) set theory: for realizing the Gödel (1931) dichotomy about the relation of arithmetic to set theory ("either incompleteness or contradiction"). The method used initially for the Champernowne constant can be generalized to any computable real number. Then, the (uncountable) set of all noncomputable reals can be defined by their representability by more than one computable real. One can speak of the "relativity of rationality / irrationality" (or computability / non-computability) in Skolem's (1922) manner or even it to be continued to the "relativity of P / NP" in the "P vs NP problem: a conjecture visualized by the computability or non-computability of reals.

The proper mathematical proof of Riemann's hypothesis (RH) in Hilbert mathematics is suggested. It follows the methodological and philosophical considerations in Part I of the paper. Riemann's zeta function is continued "physically" at its single and simple pole conventionally to be square integrable there (though not being analytical only there) and thus everywhere on the complex plane in order to be interpreted as a wave function (though with a singularity at the pole, and thus generalizing the Hilbert-Polya conjecture's viewpoint). Therefore, is interpreted physically corresponding to ζ(????) some quantum state described by it This allows for applying the Noether (1918) first theorem after its reformulation by means of the newly introduced "nonstandard bijection" meaning the mapping of any mathematical structure and its nonstandard model after the Löwenheim-Skolem theorem. Then, the additive semigroup of its trivial zeros implies for all nontrivial zeros to share the critical line (i.e. proving RH) furthermore reasoning the reciprocity of the former generator "2" and the constant "½" of "Re(s) = ½". That approach for proving RH implies as "byproducts" also: the fundamentally random (GUE) distribution of all nontrivial zeros due to "nonstandard bijection"; the generalization of the axiom of induction to a conservation low as for the set-theoretical "continuation" of arithmetic (thus from the axiom of induction the axiom of infinity); the generalization of the Noether theorem in a few consecutive levels reaching even to set theory and the foundations of mathematics (after Hilbert arithmetic and ontomathematics). An idea for proving Goldbach's conjecture in Hilbert arithmetic (in a forthcoming paper) is reasoned as a corollary from the same approach for proving RH.

The CMI Millennium “P vs NP Problem” can be resolved e.g. if one shows at least one counterexample to the "P = NP" conjecture. A certain class of problems being such counterexamples will be formulated. This implies the rejection of the hypothesis that "P = NP" for any conditions satisfying the formulation of the problem. Thus, the solution "P is different from NP" of the problem in general is proved. The class of counterexamples can be interpreted as any quantum superposition of any finite set of quantum states. The Kochen-Specker theorem is involved. Any fundamentally random choice among a finite set of alternatives belong to "NP" but not to "P". The conjecture that the set complement of "P" to "NP" can be described by that kind of choice exhaustively is formulated.

The concept of quantum information is introduced as both normed superposition of two orthogonal sub-spaces of the separable complex Hilbert space and in-variance of Hamilton and Lagrange representation of any mechanical system. The base is the isomorphism of the standard introduction and the representation of a qubit to a 3D unit ball, in which two points are chosen. The separable complex Hilbert space is considered as the free variable of quantum information and any point in it (a wave function describing a state of a quantum system) as its value as the bound variable. A qubit is equivalent to the generalization of ‘bit’ from the set of two equally probable alternatives to an infinite set of alternatives. Then, that Hilbert space is considered as a generalization of Peano arithmetic where any unit is substituted by a qubit and thus the set of natural number is mappable within any qubit as the complex internal structure of the unit or a different state of it. Thus, any mathematical structure being reducible to set theory is re-presentable as a set of wave functions and a subspace of the separable complex Hilbert space, and it can be identified as the category of all categories for any functor represents an operator transforming a set (or subspace) of the separable complex Hilbert space into another. Thus, category theory is isomorphic to the Hilbert-space representation of set theory & Peano arithmetic as above. Given any value of quantum information, i.e. a point in the separable complex Hilbert space, it always admits two equally acceptable interpretations: the one is physical, the other is mathematical. The former is a wave function as the exhausted description of a certain state of a certain quantum system. The latter chooses a certain mathematical structure among a certain category. Thus there is no way to be distinguished a mathematical structure from a physical state for both are described exhaustedly as a value of quantum information. This statement in turn can be utilized to be defined quantum information by the identity of any mathematical structure to a physical state, and also vice versa. Further, that definition is equivalent to both standard definition as the normed superposition and in-variance of Hamilton and Lagrange interpretation of mechanical motion introduced in the beginning of the paper. Then, the concept of information symmetry can be involved as the symmetry between three elements or two pairs of elements: Lagrange representation and each counterpart of the pair of Hamilton representation. The sense and meaning of information symmetry may be visualized by a single (quantum) bit and its interpretation as both (privileged) reference frame and the symmetries of the Standard model.