We prove a machine-checked limit theorem for closed physical theories: if a universe supports physically realizable universal computation, stable macroscopic records, and record-level expression of halting facts, then no total computable law can decide all record-truth on the corresponding diagonal-capable fragment. The result is machine-checked in Lean 4 with zero custom axioms on the diagonal-barrier proof chain cited below. The theorem has two parts: = (*) (Physical Universal Computation implies Diagonal Capability) If a framework's record fragment can encode universal computation and express halting, then it is diagonal-capable in the Arithmetic Self-Reference (ASR) sense. (Diagonal Capability implies Incompleteness) By the diagonal barrier (Theorem 5. 9, machine-checked via Mathlib's halting undecidability), record-truth on the ASR fragment is not computably decidable. Combining these: in any universe where computers exist and their halting behavior is physically meaningful at the record level, no total computable procedure can decide all record-truth questions on the diagonal-capable fragment. This is a Gödel/Turing-class constraint on the form of closed physical theories, now kernel-verified with the premise "computers exist" rather than "ASR is assumed. " This paper isolates the formal theorem itself. It does not assume the full downstream ontological or domain-specific claims of the broader program. Its contribution is a precise, machine-checked barrier theorem: once a universe can stably record computations about computations, algorithmic totality fails at the record-semantic level. Trust boundary. The Lean chain is nems-lean (diagonal barrier via Mathlib halting) ; the physical antecedent is the "universal computation + halting at records" premise bundle stated in the body. See.
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Nova Spivack
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Nova Spivack (Sun,) studied this question.
www.synapsesocial.com/papers/69d49fe5b33cc4c35a22861e — DOI: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.19429734
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: