[extropy-chat] A crushing defense of objective ethics. Universal Volition and 'Ought' from 'is'.

Samantha Atkins sjatkins at mac.com
Wed May 11 09:13:38 UTC 2005

On May 11, 2005, at 2:17 AM, Eugen Leitl wrote:

> On Wed, May 11, 2005 at 06:15:51PM +1200, Marc Geddes wrote:
>> According to current knowledge, we know next to
>> nothing about the ultimate fate of the universe.
> We do know that the Omega point theory has been falsified.

Please explain.  If we really don't understand all that much about  
some crucial cosmological questions can't we only say (at most) that  
it is false in the context of current theories?  With things like  
dark energy thrown in as some mysterious something that makes our  
models sort of work for now, I hardly have a lot of confidence to say  
our theries are strong enough to make good predicitons about far  
future.  As Omega point theory is far future I thus think I need more  
than current cosmological theories to say it has been falsified.

> Also, we have empirical data on the past, current, and can  
> extrapolate --
> though not into far future.
> I wouldn't call this next to nothing -- that's be well before Edwin  
> Hubble.
>> Since next to nothing is known about the nature of the
>> dark energy, conclusions about the ultimate fate of
>> the universe are seriously premature at this time.
> You're making a prediction. You have to make a prediction using the  
> current
> state of cosmology, or refrain from doing so.

What prediction?

- s

More information about the extropy-chat mailing list