A prediction that nature's correct description may outstrip human understanding draws a rebuttal
In an Oct. 19 post, skdh argues that human understanding should not be required for scientific progress.
TLDR
skdh predicts that the correct description of nature will eventually be too complex for humans to understand and argues that AI is the way forward. In an Oct. 19 quote-post, aran_nayebi considers how people might rely on useful things no one understands. Grady_Booch replies that an incomprehensible description would indicate it is incorrect. The exchange concerns a predicted future, not a threshold shown to have been reached.
Combined views
—
5 Sources, first seen ago