Philosophical and mathematical reflection on Riemann’s hypothesis. I Reframing in Hilbert arithmetic

What should be the “physical interpretation” of Riemann’s hypothesis? Can its eventual physical interpretation pioneer a pathway for the proper mathematical proof? Answers to both questions are researched in the framework of ontomathematics inherently involving the unity of physics, mathematics, and philosophy. After that viewpoint, a philosophical method for reinterpreting most fundamental mathematical problems (in particular, the seven “Millennium Problems” of CMI) is suggested. Loosely speaking, it consists in determining the ontomathematical “forest” in which the “tree” of a certain very essential mathematical problem is situated, after which the shortest syllogism eventually needing a relevant “Gestalt change” appears to be natural and almost obvious, furthermore rather elementarily provable. One even notices that many (if not all) most fundamental problems of contemporary mathematics appeal to the same “Gestalt change” needing the “Cartesian glasses” to be “put off” and Modernity and its episteme to be abandoned. As for mathematics itself, one can conjecture that many or all of the most fundamental problems are (or at least, are linkable to) Gödel’s insoluble statements. Ontomathematics suggests a general framework (also) for resolving many essential mathematical problems by breaking the Cartesian prejudice established by Modernity: then, Riemann’s hypothesis can be reformulated in terms of the qubit Hilbert space so that the “zeta function” belongs to it. If one manages to demonstrate this, Riemann’s hypothesis is rather easily provable since it refers to the fundamental reducibility of any qubit to a single bit “after measurement