Is it possible for a single man to master all science? And if

define "master"

>>8818650
No. I like to think academics are comparable to sports. If science is mma then you physically couldn't master all of it because there are different weight classes. You couldn't be a heavyweight and a welterweight at the same time.

Knowledge of the universe is practically infinite. You will never "master" it.

>>8818651
top-tier understanding
>>8818655
many fighters go through different weights. it's possible to conquer many different weights at different times.
>>8818657
obviously not 'everything'. just current knowledge

>>8818650
Thomas Young style?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Young_(scientist)

Assuming you had a perfect photographic memory and could memorize anything after reading it once, then even if you spent every waking hour studying for 100 years would would still not make it through the entirety of human understanding.

The main problem is that more than 1 days worth of new scientific papers are published every day. You would never be completely current in your understanding.

>>8818676
Yeah but not at the same time. That's my point, you'll never have it all mastered at the same time.

>>8818650
Yes, I have done so myself, ask me anything.

>>8818650
Yep, his name is God and he is real.

>>8818699
Why not? I'm unsure how being top tier in biology would stop you from being top tier in physics.

>>8818676
>it's possible to conquer many different weights at different times.

Connor McGregor conquered two of them and that's unprecedented in the UFC.

You don't have the time or the resources to make state-of-the-art publications in material physics, particle physics, theoretical physics, astronomy, inorganic chemistry, organic chemistry, biochemistry, bacteriology, virology, veterinary medicine, and human medicine.

Especially when you will have two PhDs in virology who disagree with each other.

Watson

No. There are categories within categories of science you'd need to master.

>>8818650
Create new fields of science to study and master

>>8818650
Watch an episode of Rick and Morty.

>>8818650
Yes get a phd in chemistry, physics and biology

>tfw the hardest part of science is picking a field.

>>8818650
Does one man have to learn everything to understand how everything works?

I think that at some point one man could understand all basics and link each field together.

File: bastien-grivet-overcast-bastien-grivet.jpg (265KB, 1920x851px) Image search: [Google]

265KB, 1920x851px

Not 'completely' but I assume you don't mean that.

Really good at nearly everything? ( You just simply cannot be asked a question in which you can't reply with a very informative and well thought out answer. )

Yes. But you'd have to find a way to prolong your life, since simply learning something will not be so straightforward anymore and how you view things will start to play a factor. In other words, experience. One human life span will not be enough.

Haha a single man can't even master a single scientific field.

>>8818650
No. Not even Von Neumann, who was both a genius and a polymath, came close to it. Scientific knowledge is so deep and complex these days that I doubt even most computers could store and process such amount of data.

>>8819024
>>tfw the hardest part of science is picking a field.
>tfw the hardest part is picking science.

>>8818650
Define 'science' and 'master'.

If "mastering" means having comprehensive practical and theoretical knowledge and being up to date on recent developments (which it should), it's probably impossible.

If "science" isn't just limited to 'biology, physics, chemistry and maths' but also incorporates every single subfield like protein dynamics, dendrochronology, theoretical low-temperature physics and so on it's even more impossible.

File: IMG_5125.jpg (76KB, 600x516px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 600x516px

>mfw when i'm close to mastering all of science but now i have to master poli sci and social sciences