When we know everything?

[dannyd]

My suspicion is that the universe does not take kindly to self-awareness and when the occasional species evolves to that point the universe, in its ancient, cold, and mindless manner deals harshly with them. Imagine, if you can, the mega-immense amount of fear and pain all of our species has suffered since we came to self-awareness. -d

 

[alokmohan]

Previously God stayed on mounts of hill.Men conquered this.So he has shifted up.

 

[dannyd]

Too bad we can't soon catch his imperious celestial ass and put him in front of Judge Judy. I can hear her now - "Listen you bully - maybe everyone is is afraid of you - but not me! You have the power to prevent all the pain and suffering and you do nothing! Your inaction, due to your immense vanity, is the real original sin.I sentence you to 10 years in Buffalo." -d

 

[alokmohan]

Alsorfoshaug<br />comet<br />07/20/06 12:02 PM<br /> Re: When we know everything? [re: nexium][link to this post] Reply <br /> <br /> <br /><br /><br />I am quite certain that the day humanity know everything, we will also have disproven the existence of god, the tooth fairey, superman and santa claus. <br /><br /><br />If god exists, he is deliberately hiding from us (or else we should have seen him, right?). And being divine and all, he'll be able to do that forever, no matter how advanced we become. So we'll never prove the existence of god. <br /><br />We might never disprove his existence either, but as we gain more and more knowledge of how the universe came to be and how everything works (and especially the day we know more or less "everything"), god becomes more and more faint. There was a time - only a few hundred years ago - when god was believed to literally hover just above the clouds (or just above the blue dome of the sky on a clear day). They believed he literally created the world in 7 days, just a few thousand years ago. <br /><br />He has already retreated back in time and away from Earth as we explore and learn more and more about the universe. He has now been placed in another dimension (the modern perception of "heaven"), and his divine work must at least have taken place millions, if not billions of years ago. One day he will vanish completely from people's minds and will be forgotten long before humanity comes close to know everything. <br /><br />This is of course just my opinion, and everyone is entitled to believe what they want. <br /><br /><br />I believe it's completely impossible to know everything. Of course it's practically impossible, but I also think it's theoretically and philosophically impossible. There's always something to learn or explore - if nothing else we would at least not know what to research next<br /> <br />Lively discussion .Pray carry on.

 

[derekmcd]

I think it is impossible to actually know if you know everything.<br /><br />Journalist: "Sir, I understand you have announced that you know everything."<br /><br />Mr. Know-It-All: "Why, yes I do."<br /><br />Journalist: "How can you be certain?"<br /><br />Mr. Know-It-All: "I have discovered, experimented with, and verified everything discoverable."<br /><br />Journalist: "How do you know there is nothing left to discover?"<br /><br />Mr. Know-It-All: "Because I haven't discovered it."<br /><br />Journalist: "With infinite possibilities out there, is it possible there is something that is impossible to discover and thus not knowable?"<br /><br />Mr Know-It-All: "No."<br /><br />Journalist: "How can you be certain?"<br /><br />Mr. Know-It-All: "Because I haven't discovered it."<br /><br />Journalist: "Hmm... ok. Do you know what I am going to say next?"<br /><br />Mr. Know-It-All: "Yes I do. You are going to say, "How did you know that?""<br /><br />Journalist: "Good guess." <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div> </div><br /><div><span style="color:#0000ff" class="Apple-style-span">"If something's hard to do, then it's not worth doing." - Homer Simpson</span></div> </div>

 

[dannyd]

On a serious note - My view is that if one is willing to forego our human predeliction for inventing god(s) it is sadly true that the actual TRUTH behind the universe - whatever or whomever it may be - is probably beyond the ken of our minds - perhaps forever. The only thing worse than not knowing the answer to something is pretending you do. -d

 

[eagledare]

If we had millions of years we could maybe learn something. The learning curve is very slow because of the human social structures in every level of society. If you are outside of a click (were not at the right school with the right lecturer) your theory will not be accepted and that goes for all spheres of science, theoligy or any other. So the acceptance of new theories are very slow.<br />Here is a website that has some history on the pioneers of science and what it took to change the mindset of people at the time. http://www.4threvolt.com/index.html <br />We are standing at the brink of a lot of knowledge but through different channels than the old order and the old order is very stuburn to let go of their possition of power. They argue that how can you, a non scientist know anything without validated proof. So the overall knowledge curve is flattened out. <br />Here is two more sites that can show you recent strides in our understanding of the universe that is brushed aside by the learnered ones.<br />http://www.nealadams.com/nmu.html<br />http://www.geocities.com/chrismoolman/index.html<br />www.geocities.com/chrismoolman/index.html]<br />

 

[SpeedFreek]

The answer could be here <br /><br />On a philosophical level, maybe if we ever know everything, we would be in a position to create or destroy universes ourselves. We would be the "gods".<br /><br />Maybe thats what happened the last time eh? <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#ff0000">_______________________________________________<br /></font><font size="2"><em>SpeedFreek</em></font> </p> </div>

 

[harmonicaman]

<i>"We don't know a millionth of one percent about anything."</i> <br /><br /> - <b>Thomas A. Edison</b> (1847 - 1931) <br />

 

[pioneer0333]

Thanks for the links, a growing Earth is a completely new concept that I would never have even thought of! <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[eagledare]

Thanks Pioneer0333 you are the first one in all my postings that appreciate an new concept.

 

[eagledare]

Earlier I posted something about why our learning curve is almost flattened by social structures and I found the following link to back it up.<br />[Peer Review] is an undisputed cornerstone of modern science. Central to the competitive clash of ideas that moves knowledge forward, peer review enjoys so much renown in the scientific community that studies lacking its imprimatur meet with automatic skepticism. Academic reputations hinge on an ability to get work through peer review and into leading journals; university presses employ peer review to decide which books they're willing to publish; and federal agencies like the National Institutes of Health use peer review to weigh the merits of applications for federal research grants. <br /><br />http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/category/climate-science/sun-earth-connections/

 

[MeteorWayne]

Are you implying that is bad?<br />Most scientists are open to new ideas even if they don't agree.<br />Having an argumant or paper that can at least pass the test of sensibility can be a good thing.<br />"Crackpot" ideas abound. Yes, peer review has slowed down the process of accepting new ideas at times (see plate tectonics), but in the long run, the science wins out. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>

 

[eagledare]

If humans were different it would have been a good thing but being as we are, pride, prestige, money and positions of power gets in the way of honesty and there lies the big problem. Like you said plate tectonics was accepted but now expanding earth is going through the same struggle to get accepted and in there lies so many new theories that will advance science by at least 50% in the next few years. For example, where did the water come from to fill the ocean was it always in the earth or was it created out of energy.

 

[MeteorWayne]

Sorry, eagledare, in my opinion (which is just that) you're barking up a big tree here.<br />There is no real evidence for an expanding earth.<br /><br />There was (in retrospect, I admit) evidence for plate tectonics.<br /><br />Since it isn't even your theory (or is it?) why are you pushing it so hard? <br /><br />You read something that makes sense to you?<br /><br />I do understand. In my youth, I believed in astrology, and other stuff.<br /><br />Life has taught me that I was naive, and that wasn't the only place that was the case.<br /><br />Live and Learn. It's a good idea.<br /><img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /><br /><br />Live and never learn........?<br />Is that better? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>

 

[dannyd]

Speedfreak: If you have not already you may want to check out Frank Tipler's The Omega Point. -dannyd.