  The famous G\"odel incompleteness theorem states that for every consistent
sufficiently rich formal theory T there exist true statements that are
unprovable in T. Such statements would be natural candidates for being added as
axioms, but how can we obtain them? One classical (and well studied) approach
is to add to some theory T an axiom that claims the consistency of T. In this
paper we discuss another approach motivated by Chaitin's version of G\"odel's
theorem where axioms claiming the randomness (or incompressibility) of some
strings are probabilistically added, and show that it is not really useful, in
the sense that this does not help us to prove new interesting theorems. This
result answers a question recently asked by Lipton. The situation changes if we
take into account the size of the proofs: randomly chosen axioms may help
making proofs much shorter, unless NP=PSPACE. We then study the axiomatic power
of the statements of type "the Kolmogorov complexity of x exceeds n" in
general. They are \Pi_1 (universally quantified) statements of Peano
arithmetic. We show that by adding all true statements of this type, we obtain
a theory that proves all true \Pi_1-statements, and also provide a more
detailed classification. In particular, to derive all true \Pi_1-statements it
is sufficient to add one statement of this type for each n (or even for
infinitely many n) if strings are chosen in a special way. On the other hand,
one may add statements of this type for most x of length n (for every n) and
still obtain a weak theory. We also study other logical questions related to
"random axioms". Finally, we consider a theory that claims Martin-L\"of
randomness of a given infinite binary sequence. This claim can be formalized in
different ways. We show that different formalizations are closely related but
not equivalent, and study their properties.
