I was quite precise in my wording and didn't say what you are responding to.
My opinion (and it's just that, I'm unprepared to defend it) is that we've always been [less and less] wrong on everything.
And since we can't know what the boundaries of knowledge are, and it could easily be some insane unbounded fractal existence, it seems rash to me to decide that we know enough to say that there can't exist civilizations whose technology is magic to us.
You never know, when this advanced technology is revealed by the US military it could just be some kind of physics hack that fits in neatly somewhere and doesn't require any rewriting, just a footnote.
https://www.sciencealert.com/study-shows-how-the-universe-wo...
Sure, and that's not a problem so as long as self-consistency is preserved.
> But to rewrite how a sequence of events happens, well that's a big fundamental change.
Depends how you look at it. There are retrocausal explanations of quantum mechanics, for instance.
You break the lightcone...
> Depends how you look at it. There are retrocausal explanations of quantum mechanics, for instance.
Let me save people the time, there's critiques at the bottom but there is no actual evidence for retrocausal explanations: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/qm-retrocausality/
The point is you can't. Existence would be a static 4D structure. No matter how you tried to change the past, your attempts are already part of your own history and clearly all failed.
> Let me save people the time, there's critiques at the bottom but there is no actual evidence for retrocausal explanations: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/qm-retrocausality
There is no evidence for any interpretation of QM. That's what makes them interpretations and not distinct theories.
See my comment in the sibling subthread.