3 ms·
> The OP's point was that adding "ever" in the title means the question isn't just relevant to our current understanding of what is theoretically plausible but
by eli_gottlieb 8y ago
> The OP's point was that adding "ever" in the title means the question isn't just relevant to our current understanding of what is theoretically plausible but it also doesn't exclude some currently unknown theory that might be derived at a distant point in the future.
Or, somewhat more plausibly, some theory or technique that constitutes a minor subfield right now but could be the next big thing in another 20-30 years, or whenever someone just makes it really fast.
- laumars 8y agoI still personally think would be the former context (current tech) rather than the latter context ("ever") because you're discussing something that is already working theory - even if it is just a subfield. So the question doesn't become "Will we ever have..." but rather "When will it become...". Ever applies more for something with an indeterminate future imo.