To date, but I doubt this is a law of nature. What prevents the next big discovery from being the final piece that grounds the system making everything else fall into place?
This is a semantic debate, but "science" is the process of finding those rules. If we find an "ultimate" rule, we're still using science. (Assuming science is capable of finding that ground truth rule.)
I assumed "open system" here meant there is no ultimate rule, implying science can continue indefinitely. This aligns with our experience so far, and it does feel right to me, but I don't think we have evidence either way.
I completely agree that the scientific process is our best/only tool for meaningfully advancing our understanding of the world.
To date, but I doubt this is a law of nature. What prevents the next big discovery from being the final piece that grounds the system making everything else fall into place?