At what point will we not need to advance scientifically? Is there an endgame?

[Marathon-man]

Yes, scientific advancement, not technological advancement.

In other words, we won't stop learning how the world works.

Is theory and postulations Scientific advancements or is it when the theory is proven to be factual by inventions and discoveries?
for example when Arthur C. Clark theorized on geostationary satellites was that a scientific advancement or was it when Geostationary satellites were actually realized?

 

[origin]

Is theory and postulations Scientific advancements or is it when the theory is proven to be factual by inventions and discoveries?
for example when Arthur C. Clark theorized on geostationary satellites was that a scientific advancement or was it when Geostationary satellites were actually realized?

Both are scientific advancements. No one would build and launch a Geostationary satellite, for instance, if there was no evidence or theory that it would be geostationary. If Geostationary satellites were never launched it would still be a scientific advancement to have a theory that it was in fact viable.

 

[billvon]

Maybe when we can evolve at will or change at a molecular level to fit any environment or circumstances. That would eliminate most inventions.

I think that would _increase_ the rate of invention.

When people are living in low Earth orbit, just floating around out there - imagine how many new ideas we will have for invention.

 

[pluto2]

In my opinion humans will never know everything about the universe.

We don't even know what happened before the Big Bang or whether the Multiverse exists. We don't know why there is something rather than nothing.

Science will never know everything because the more science discovers the more open questions remain to be answered.

 

[DaveC426913]

In my opinion humans will never know everything about the universe.

We don't even know what happened before the Big Bang or whether the Multiverse exists.

Well, technically, those are both external to the universe, so...

Science will never know everything because the more science discovers the more open questions remain to be answered.

Because that has always been the case does not necessarily mean it will continue to always be the case. We are still in our infancy at this sciencing game.

 

[JJM]

Advancement is a measurement, demanded by those that ask why. For truths' sake, its a satisfaction. Answering the question, Am I correct?

 

[TheFrogger]

Perhaps curing death will bring an end to scientific advancement.

 

[River Ape]

Is there an endgame?
The ultimate scientific achievement will be perfect foresight of future events.
Until then, we'll just keep worrying away at science.
Afterwards, a reality we are not built to cope with.

 

[sideshowbob]

Perhaps curing death will bring an end to scientific advancement.

Clearly not. If death was curable, we could devise a whole lot of new ways to have fun.

 

[orcot]

There is as yet insufficient data for a meaningul answer

 

[just me]

I took this quote from DaveC in another thread...

In the year 3535
Ain't gonna need to tell the truth, tell no lie
Everything you think, do and say
Is in the pill you took today

... which got me thinking.

What is the point of all this scientific advancement.

I mean, I think it is at a stage where humans can simply chill, and enjoy.

Why the need for anymore advancement.

Jan.

it isn't a need, its a want.
but that doesn't make it in any way illegitimate.

 

[just me]

when people can do anything, there will be no more need for scientific advancement.

 

[kx000]

Once were omniscient we can stop learning.

 

[(Q)]

In my opinion humans will never know everything about the universe.

We don't even know what happened before the Big Bang or whether the Multiverse exists. We don't know why there is something rather than nothing.

Science will never know everything because the more science discovers the more open questions remain to be answered.

In other words, we will never stop learning and growing. You seem to make that out to be a bad thing.

 

[sculptor]

Perhaps:
One day, people will delude themselves into thinking themselves omniscient, and begin to use phrases like: "The science is settled" and no longer consider scientific endeavours worth while(especially those which contradict their dogma du jour ), then science will stagnate until sanity returns and people understand that they are ignorant about so many things, and that those things may be of value if understood. Then. science may have a rebirth, a renaissance.
The pendulum swings.
.......................
will it ever stop swinging?

 

[TheFrogger]

Will we ever cure death?

 

[sideshowbob]

Will we ever cure death?

It's unlikely that we'll ever cure being eaten by piranhas. Or dying of exposure in the wilderness and being scavenged. But there will be more and more cures for other causes of death.

 

[Jan Ardena]

I know that you're spiritual/religious, but science isn't our enemy.

Science is knowledge.
We couldn’t exist without knowledge.
We’re all essentially spiritual, and religion is away to become aware of that. So religion is simply knowledge of how to be the best we can possibly be. Of course it depends on what that particular religion teaches.

 

[Jan Ardena]

Will we ever cure death?

We can’t do that.
But we may be able to digitise our brain patterns (somehow), which may have imprints of our mind via our memory. Store it, and put it into synthetic bodies.
Sci-Fi?
Sure.
Could it become reality.
Idk.

 

[(Q)]

Science is knowledge.
We couldn’t exist without knowledge.
We’re all essentially spiritual, and religion is away to become aware of that. So religion is simply knowledge of how to be the best we can possibly be. Of course it depends on what that particular religion teaches.

You should speak for yourself rather than including everyone else in your illusions.