3 ms·
Hubrisimus. Our current models are the most useful ones we have that fit our limited dataset, but we have no clue whether we understand the first thing about sp
by breck 6y ago
Hubrisimus. Our current models are the most useful ones we have that fit our limited dataset, but we have no clue whether we understand the first thing about space and time and the age and size of the universe(s).
- macintux 6y agoWhat's the alternative to working with the data you have?
- TheOtherHobbes 6y agoThere is no alternative to working with the data you have. But believing that you understand the data when there are huge glaring inconsistencies in your understanding is... naive.
- macintux 6y agoI guess I missed the part where this was proclaimed to be Truth.
- breck 6y agoYeah fair enough I didn't specifically point out the part I was responding to. He says there are only 3 possibilities (the part starting with "then either" 1) ... 2) ... 3) ... But that's ignoring category 4) which is that we have only a fraction of a fraction of a grain of sand of the real data, and might be a bit early to come to conclusions. So not to say #3 is wrong, and heck it could very well be more probably than #1 and #2, but I wouldn't bet the house yet when we don't know if there's an option #4 - #4,000,000,000,000 because we haven't even observed data from dimensions we don't even know exist it.