• spiderwort@lemm.eeOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    No, haven’t. Thanks. Also consider “A Canticle for Leibowitz”.

    My point is that, over time, knowledge gets corrupted. Especially esoteric knowledge. And it might not even take much time.

    So you gotta wonder what myths we’ve got now that started as sincere attempts at a model.

    And even in the short term. When a guy who made the observation and crafted the model tells you the model, your understanding and his are probably not the same.

    So there’s that corruption to consider.

    • gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      8 months ago

      “Physics” is more or less syntactic sugar for “how the universe works”. It’s not a belief system. It’s just the way work - and, in fact, it’s allowing you to experience cognition and sapience, as well as enabling you to ask this latest in a sequence of odd and strangely aimed questions. But I digress: Our understanding more or less of the universe and its operation doesn’t change its fundamental nature.

      We gained our knowledge of physics through experimentation and logical extrapolation.

      Any knowledge gained from experimental evidence can be regained.

      Ergo, knowledge that is lost - or as you put it, “corrupted” - will be re-learned and/or corrected in time, so long as the species whose knowledge we’re discussing doesn’t straight up go extinct.