>>had ever seen the stars that they can depict. I hope that imagination
>>would have driven science in discovery even in the absence of easily
>>observable puzzles.[JHW]
> I believe it would have. But I meant what if there had been
nothing else to >discover?:
> "suppose that objective reality consisted only of the moon. sun,
>earth. That is to say nothing more was observable because nothing more
>existed, then what would science have looked like?"
> I just think this hypothetical helps shed light on the nature of
>science.<
Let's see; we would have biology, geology, mathematics and zoology
essentially as-is, I suppose; astronomy ( and astrology ) would be absent
or in radically different form; physics would be handicapped with little
or no light-bending phenomena to observe to validate/disprove
Alternate-Einstein's relativity theorems. That's all I can come up with
at the moment.
james