Skakos wrote:I wanted to see if "total knowledge of everything" is possible.
This is not a question that can be answered by speculative methods, nor by empirical methods.
For the simple reason that there is no knowledge or approx. knowledge of what it is we don't know.
Total knowledge can only be proven if total knowledge is attained. But total knowledge can only be attained by accumulating knowledge, and unfortunately there is no post in the groud of knowledge, "this is it, the buck stops here". Because there is no way of knowing what it is that we don't know.
I would like to show a thought experiment for this. There are two contestants in a room, and two contestants in another room. The two rooms are incommunicado -- cannot send information from one room to the other.
I am the experimenter. I am in one of the rooms. I ask this form the two people there: "I have a question in mind. Please answer it, and write your answer on down."
After this, a collection of written answers will be performed.
From all four contestants.
All four contestants were previosly given a pencil and a paper.
The two contestants in my room write something down. It does not matter what, there is no reasonable way they can guess the answer to a question they did not hear.
So far so good.
Now, after the collection of answers form the contestants in the other room, what will the test marker see on their paper?
You must put yourself in their situation: they were taken to a room, each was given a piece of paper and a pencil, and a little while later someone came in and collected the paper from them.
I daresay the papers from the other room were blank, nothing was written on them.
So far so good.
Now, create a fractal of this. The people who were subject when I was the experimenter, will become experimenters, and are told to perform the same experiment.
Therefore in the next iteration of the experiment, there will be four experimenters, and sixteen contestants. Same setup for each experimenter as it was for me. The four experimenters will have two students in the same room with each, and two in rooms incommunicado. Of the four rooms with both experimenters and subjects, two experimenters will ask the same question as I had of them, and four subjects will write something down. Twelve subjects will not write down anything, but stare and look around, waiting for something to happen. And two of the experimenters will be completely clueless as to what the hell is going on, and what they are supposed to be doing, if anything.
This progression can go on infinetely, given enough human participants.
This is the progression of knowledge. We don't know what it is we don't know, we only know what we know. We can point out things we don't know and source them, but there are things we can't point out and can't source them, and we still don't know them. We don't even know they exist.
This is why total knowledge is possible, and the opposite is also possible, but we will never know if it is possible for sure or not.