I have been thinking that is impossible for ANYTHING to understand EVERYTHING. Because ANYTHING will always be a part of EVERYTHING, and you need EVERYTHING to understand EVERYTHING.
Any system will always be a sub-system of some other system.
Also I’ve been thinking about something I read: “The more close or deep we see, the more it seems to be nothing there”. I think it was related to subatomic particles, which seems to be just fields of energy instead of matter or something like that.
I’d appreciate if someone wants to share a few comments or thoughts about this with me.
I have been thinking that is impossible for ANYTHING to understand EVERYTHING. Because ANYTHING will always be a part of EVERYTHING, and you need EVERYTHING to understand EVERYTHING.
Any system will always be a sub-system of some other system.
Also I’ve been thinking about something I read: “The more close or deep we see, the more it seems to be nothing there”. I think it was related to subatomic particles, which seems to be just fields of energy instead of matter or something like that.
I’d appreciate if someone wants to share a few comments or thoughts about this with me.
From Statistics (commonly attributed to George Box):
“All models are wrong, but some models are useful.”
Our models for how everything works are generally more useful than they are wrong for “normal” conditions, and more wrong than useful at the extremes.