Hyde Parke;1101218 said:all of this sounds like a bubble, operating from the confinement of the mind. and really if something is already there, and we just
havent disovered it yet, does that truly make it new?
I contend, to get a complete and accurate picture, which is still limited, we would need to go everywhere, because as you stated
conditions vary, and that if the law is independent of the conditions, then the conditions are something else altogether which each have laws of their own...and that is this "more understanding" you speak of. We can understand more and more, but
we will not come upon the actual thing. the closest we can come is a generic re-creation, an imitation.
We gain almost nothing going anywhere in the universe regarding our understanding of gravity for instance. There really isn't any reason to hunt for answer anywhere else but here save for a few special circumstances. This is the driving concept in physic usually referred to as generalization. Enistein's Special Relativity was a generalization of galileo's principle of relativity. His General Relativity generalized it further to include general coordinate transformations and especially gravity. At this point we only care about the behaviour of gravity in extremely high energy states and extremely dense points of space. The vast majority of places in the universe can no longer reveal much regarding gravity. We certainly can learn about specific pheonomenom binary stars or novas etc by observing them but the chances they provide new insight on the fundemental rules on physics becomes more and more limited each passing year. The horizons that we can see in physics are not bounded by distances or locations but by the energy states we can produce at the particle level.
Last edited: