Undecidability and unpredictability: not limitations, but triumphs of science
Markus P. Mueller

TL;DR
The paper challenges the view that undecidability and unpredictability are fundamental limitations of science, proposing instead that they reflect the nature of real patterns and structure, leading to a more optimistic scientific outlook.
Contribution
It introduces a structural notion of 'real patterns' as fundamental, replacing traditional metaphysical views and reframing undecidability as undifferentiation of structure rather than limitation.
Findings
Undecidability reflects structural undifferentiation, not epistemic limitations.
Modern physics supports a worldview focusing on patterns over things.
This perspective fosters an optimistic view of scientific knowledge.
Abstract
It is a widespread belief that results like G\"odel's incompleteness theorems or the intrinsic randomness of quantum mechanics represent fundamental limitations to humanity's strive for scientific knowledge. As the argument goes, there are truths that we can never uncover with our scientific methods, hence we should be humble and acknowledge a reality beyond our scientific grasp. Here, I argue that this view is wrong. It originates in a naive form of metaphysics that sees the physical and Platonic worlds as a collection of things with definite properties such that all answers to all possible questions exist ontologically somehow, but are epistemically inaccessible. This view is not only a priori philosophically questionable, but also at odds with modern physics. Hence, I argue to replace this perspective by a worldview in which a structural notion of `real patterns', not `things' are…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
