The paper is a continuation of Part I. The case of “n=3” is inferred as a corollary from the Kochen and Specker theorem (1967): the eventual solutions of Fermat’s equation for “n=3” would correspond to an admissible disjunctive division of qubit into two absolutely independent parts therefore versus the contextuality of any qubit, implied by the Kochen – Specker theorem. Incommensurability (implied by the absence of hidden variables) is considered as dual to quantum contextuality. The relevant mathematical structure is Hilbert arithmetic in a wide sense, in which Hilbert arithmetic in a narrow sense and the qubit Hilbert space are dual . A few cases involving set theory are possible: (1) only within the case “n=3” and implicitly, within any next level of “n” in Fermat’s equation; (2) the identification of the case “n=3” and the general case utilizing the axiom of choice rather than the axiom of induction.
The paper is a continuation of Part I. The case of “n=3” is inferred as a corollary from the Kochen and Specker theorem (1967): the eventual solutions of Fermat’s equation for “n=3” would correspond to an admissible disjunctive division of qubit into two absolutely independent parts therefore versus the contextuality of any qubit, implied by the Kochen – Specker theorem. Incommensurability (implied by the absence of hidden variables) is considered as dual to quantum contextuality. The relevant mathematical structure is Hilbert arithmetic in a wide sense, in which Hilbert arithmetic in a narrow sense and the qubit Hilbert space are dual . A few cases involving set theory are possible: (1) only within the case “n=3” and implicitly, within any next level of “n” in Fermat’s equation; (2) the identification of the case “n=3” and the general case utilizing the axiom of choice rather than the axiom of induction.
The paper is a continuation of another paper (https://philpapers.org/rec/PENFLT-2) published as Part I. Now, the case of “n=3” is inferred as a corollary from the Kochen and Specker theorem (1967): the eventual solutions of Fermat’s equation for “n=3” would correspond to an admissible disjunctive division of qubit into two absolutely independent parts therefore versus the contextuality of any qubit, implied by the Kochen – Specker theorem. Incommensurability (implied by the absence of hidden variables) is considered as dual to quantum contextuality. The relevant mathematical structure is Hilbert arithmetic in a wide sense (https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3656179), in the framework of which Hilbert arithmetic in a narrow sense and the qubit Hilbert space are dual to each other. A few cases involving set theory are possible: (1) only within the case “n=3” and implicitly, within any next level of “n” in Fermat’s equation; (2) the identification of the case “n=3” and the general case utilizing the axiom of choice rather than the axiom of induction. If the former is the case, the application of set theory and arithmetic can remain disjunctively divided: set theory, “locally”, within any level; and arithmetic, “globally”, to all levels. If the latter is the case, the proof is thoroughly within set theory. Thus, the relevance of Yablo’s paradox to the statement of Fermat’s last theorem is avoided in both cases. The idea of “arithmetic mechanics” is sketched: it might deduce the basic physical dimensions of mechanics (mass, time, distance) from the axioms of arithmetic after a relevant generalization, Furthermore, a future Part III of the paper is suggested: FLT by mediation of Hilbert arithmetic in a wide sense can be considered as another expression of Gleason’s theorem in quantum mechanics: the exclusions about (n = 1, 2) in both theorems as well as the validity for all the rest values of “n” can be unified after the theory of quantum information. The availability (respectively, non-availability) of solutions of Fermat’s equation can be proved as equivalent to the non-availability (respectively, availability) of a single probabilistic measure as to Gleason’s theorem.
In a previous paper (https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3648127 ), I have demonstrated an elementary and thoroughly arithmetical proof of Fermat’s last theorem by induction if the case for “n = 3” is granted as proved only arithmetically (a fact a long time ago). Now the same case of “n=3” is inferred as a corollary from the Kochen and Specker theorem (1968): the eventual validity of Fermat’s equation would correspond to an admissible disjunctive division of a qubit into two absolutely independent parts therefore versus the contextuality of any qubit, implied by the Kochen –Specker theorem. The proof involves set theory, but only within the case “n=3” and implicitly, within any next levels of “n”. Thus the application of set theory and arithmetic can remain disjunctively divided as well: set theory, “locally”, within any level; and arithmetic, “globally”, to all levels. Thus, the relevance of Yablo’s paradox to the statement of Fermat’s last theorem is avoided. However, the mathematical structure relevant to the proof cannot be restricted to Peano arithmetic but to a generalized structure called “Hilbert arithmetic” and discussed in detail in another previous paper (https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3656179 ). Furthermore, Fermat’s last theorem in virtue of that kind of proof can be considered as another expression of Gleason’s theorem in quantum mechanics (or vice versa): the exclusions about (n = 1, 2) in both theorems as well as the validity for all the rest values of “n” can be unified after the theory of quantum information: the availability (respectively, non-availability) of solutions of Fermat’s equation can be proved as equivalent the non-availability (respectively, availability) of a single probabilistic measure as to Gleason’s theorem.
The previous two parts of the paper (correspondingly, https://philpapers.org/rec/PENFLT-2 and https://philpapers.org/rec/PENFLT-3) demonstrate that the interpretation of Fermat’s last theorem (FLT) in Hilbert arithmetic meant both in a narrow sense and in a wide sense can suggest a proof by induction in Part I and by means of the Kochen - Specker theorem in Part II. The same interpretation can serve also for a proof FLT based on Gleason’s theorem and partly similar to that in Part II. The concept of (probabilistic) measure of a subspace of Hilbert space and especially its uniqueness can be unambiguously linked to that of partial algebra or incommensurability, or interpreted as a relation of the two dual branches of Hilbert arithmetic in a wide sense. The investigation of the last relation allows for FLT and Gleason’s theorem to be equated in a sense, as two dual counterparts, and the former to be inferred from the latter, as well as vice versa under an additional condition relevant to the Gödel incompleteness of arithmetic to set theory. The qubit Hilbert space itself in turn can be interpreted by the unity of FLT and Gleason’s theorem. The proof of such a fundamental result in number theory as FLT by means of Hilbert arithmetic in a wide sense can be generalized to an idea about “quantum number theory”. It is able to research mathematically the origin of Peano arithmetic from Hilbert arithmetic by mediation of the “nonstandard bijection” and its two dual branches inherently linking it to information theory. Then, infinitesimal analysis and its revolutionary application to physics can be also re-realized in that wider context, for example, as an exploration of the way for physical quantity of time (respectively, for time derivative in any temporal process considered in physics) to appear at all. Finally, the result admits a philosophical reflection of how any hierarchy arises or changes itself only thanks to its dual and idempotent counterpart.
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.
One of the main theorems on the impossibility of hidden variables in quantum mechanics is Kochen-Specker theorem (KS). This theorem says that any hidden variable theory that satisfies quantum mechanics must be contextual. More specifically, it asserts that, in Hilbert space of dimension ≥ 3, it is impossible to associate definite numerical values, 1 or 0, with every projection operator Pm, in such a way that, if a set of commuting Pm satisfies 1=ΣmP, the corresponding values will also satisfy . Since the first proof of Kochen and Specker using 117 vectors in R3, there were many attempts to reduce the number of vector either via conceiving ingenious models or extending the system being considered to higher dimension. By considering eight dimensional three qubits system, we found a state dependent proof that requires only five vectors. The state that we assign value of 1 is the ray that arises from intersection of two planes. The recent advancements show that the KS theorem proof can be extended to two dimensional quantum system through generalized measurement represented by positive operator-valued measured (POVM). In POVMs the number of available outcomes of a measurement may be higher than the dimensionality of the Hilbert space and N-outcome generalized measurement is represented by N-element POVM which consists of N positive semidefinite operators {}dE that sum to identity. Each pair of elements is not mutually orthogonal if the number of outcome of measurements is bigger than the dimensionality. In terms of POVM, Kochen-Specker theorem asserts that and could not be satisfied for . We developed a general model that enables us to generate different sizes of the POVM for the proof of the Kochen-Specker theorem. We show that the current simplest Nakamura model is in fact a special case of our model. W also provide another model which is as simple as the Nakamura’s but consists of different sets of POVM.