When will science be outdated?

Suppose there exists a time [math]t \,\in\, \mathbf R[/math] at which science [math]S[/math] is outdated.

Then there exists another thing [math]T[/math] such that [math]T[/math] explains the world better than [math]S[/math].

Then it has been proven that [math]T[/math] explains the world better than [math]S[/math].

But proving that [math]T[/math] explains the world better than [math]S[/math] requires logic which is a subset of [math]S[/math] as a subset of mathematics which is itself a subset of [math]S[/math].

Therefore the validity of [math]T[/math] depends on [math]S[/math].

Therefore [math]S[/math] is not obsolete which contradicts the assumption that [math]S[/math] was obsolete.

Therefore for all time [math]t \,\in\, \mathbf R[/math], [math]S[/math] is not obsolete, Q.E.D.

>>8564815
What a waste of time..
You invented a story and proved it wrong. Congrats!

>>8564815
>Then it has been proven that TT explains the world better than SS.

lol pathetic

>>8564769
>When will science be outdated?
When People discover a Ice Planet could be in the Same distance as Mercury towards the sun and not melt or change

>>8565374
Go to /lit/ and do not return until you can speak the fucking language.

File: 1446052792325.png (131KB, 285x256px) Image search: [Google]

131KB, 285x256px

>>8564815
>R

Democritus invented the atom thousands of years before science. Archimedes invented the circumference of the Earth millions of years before him.

>>8564815
Are you aware that Anselme de Cantorbéry used the same kind of syllogism to prove that God exist ?
>You justified science the same way middle-age theologist justified God

>>8565402
>invented

>>8564815
This is literally stating the basic logic of epistemological nihilism.

>>8564769
When we know all truths.

>>8565459
Why are Atheists so insecure?