>The fundamental issue here is not what can be known but what exists. There
>is always the danger of conflating epistemic with ontological claims.
>Knowing how long it will take a steel ball to fall from the top of the
>Gamow Tower (in the physics building here at the University of Colorado) to
>the sidewalk below is one thing (which still must be qualified by a number
>of assumptions); the actual fall of the ball is something else. Even a bit
>of knowledge which we hold with very high confidence is quite different
>from the actuality or reality of that which we have knowledge about.
I do not think that we can know that which does not exist. Of course, the
question of existence can be rather complicated. For instance, in what sense
did the Pythagorean Theorem existed before it was known by man? Or, where
did it exist before it was discovered?