: ... For another, it assumes that whatever we
: think currently is just 'right' and we now 'know' the truth (a common
: mistake among physicists that just again proves they should study more
: epistemology, or maybe just more philosophy in general). I could go on ...
: Vale,
: Perseus
When I think of what "science" thinks it knows now, I recall the fanciful inventions of Da Vinci which would not actually work (though the concepts were based on the sciences as understood then); or of "doctors" blood letting (never mind that using leeches has its applications). We might tend to think of educated people of the past as being "wrong or even ignorant" and that we are currently "right", but over time, it seems that the entire landscape of knowledge changes. I remember when the concept of a "black hole" was new (to the general public, anyway) and handled as a theory. Of course, now the existence of such an object is commonly accepted; as if the idea were always with us.
So it will be interesting to read (or watch) what cosmologists will teach us about the Universe(s) in the future, and compare that with what we are being told today. As I wrote, the landscape is ever shifting.
