[FOM] Provable security and foundations of mathematics

[katzmik at macs.biu.ac.il]

Hi Sam,

Can you give some examples of such no-go theorems in physics?

MK

On Sun, June 16, 2019 21:07, Sam Sanders wrote:
> Dear Tim,
>
> I agree with your two general reasons and would add a third one:
>
> In physics and its philosophy/foundations, there are so-called no-go theorems
> that
> are intended to express that a particular situation is physically impossible.
> These
> theorems of course only apply if the real world (or at least our physical
> theories) satisfy
> the conditions of the theorem, and therein lies the rub:
>
> certain assumptions of these theorems turn out not to be met (after careful
> inspection),
> or were correct at the time of proving these no-go theorems, but then the
> physical theories changed.
>
> All I am saying is that these no-go theorems are *extremely interesting*, but
> they are not absolute.
>
> Similarly, any “mathematical theory of security" will have basic assumptions
> that are either not met or
> will not be met in the future.  Therefore, such a theory cannot be
> absolute/ultimate in any sense.
>
> Best,
>
> Sam
> _______________________________________________
> FOM mailing list
> FOM at cs.nyu.edu
> https://cs.nyu.edu/mailman/listinfo/fom
>