Traditionally, mathematics is modeled as a formal system (F, L), where F is a framework such as ZFC, and L is a logic such as classical. I propose extending this by adding the set of all scientific observations, denoted β, along with a formal definition of existence: [P(Z) ⇔ Z], where Z is an entity (such as an electron), and P(Z) is a property (such as charge). In this system, an entity exists if and only if it possesses a property.
Thus, the formal system for physics becomes (β, F, [P(Z) ⇔ Z], L). Using this structure, mathematics, physics, and all explanations for phenomena share a common logic, ensuring that our models remain consistent with all of the tools we have for analyzing reality. This approach therefore gives us the correct meaning of time. Since every physical entity has a property P(Z), we can apply the logic L to the relationship [P(Z) ⇔ Z] to infer how all phenomena must be interpreted to maintain logical consistency. This method does not impose human will on the universe; rather, it imposes the requirement that our understanding of the universe must conform to logical coherence.
When this approach is applied to physics, it naturally resolves ALL conflicts such as the EPR Paradox and allows for a relatively straightforward unification of physics. It can also be used to systematically identify and correct logical errors within current theories. This framework establishes that it is formal logic, not mathematics, that forms the foundation of everything.
This approach to physics is very different from anything ever developed so it will not be immediately obvious until the 2nd or 3rd read through.
Article: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14813498
Sincerely,
Russell Smith
