Why do mathematical errors in infinite-dimensionality arguments undermine the physical concern, not resolve it?

Question

Antigravity · Accepted Answer

Looking at your question and the preprints provided, I can see what's at stake here.

The core pattern is this: when someone claims that a mathematical structure (like infinite-dimensional Hilbert spaces) creates a *physical* problem, finding a mathematical error in their argument doesn't automatically dismiss the underlying concern—it just means we need a better diagnosis.

The canonical example: In AG-2025.01-382, the authors demonstrate that Carcassi, Calderón and Aidala made a mathematical mistake. Specifically, the claim that "a change-of-basis unitary transformation can map states with finite expectation values to those with infinite ones" is incorrect [AG-2025.01-382]. This false claim was then used to argue that Hilbert spaces are "unphysical" because they allegedly turn "potential infinity into actual infinity." But once you spot the error, the particular argument collapses.

However, the preprint notes that "two other objections to Hilbert spaces on physical grounds, both technically correct" still remain [AG-2025.01-382]. The mathematical error was specific; the physical worry is broader.

This pattern shows up across the archive more generally. When mathematical formalism and physical interpretation diverge—as in AG-2025.02-575 on spacetime smoothness, or AG-2026.03-475 on conventionalism in relativity—fixing one mistake in the derivation reveals that the *conceptual question* was never really settled by that particular calculation. You've only cleared away one false path to the worry, not the worry itself.

The lesson: mathematical rigor is necessary but not sufficient for physical understanding. A faulty proof that "infinite-dimensional structures are problematic" doesn't prove infinite-dimensional structures are fine; it just means you need to argue it some other way.

The provided preprints don't directly explain *why* mathematical errors fail to resolve physical concerns in general—they just exemplify the pattern.