I reckon eventually we’ll reach the stage where what our conscious awareness can deal with just isn’t good enough to make sense of the phenomena that the devices we create can detect—a pretty graph just won’t do. Around the same time we’ll finally accept that restricting our notion of self to the bit that is aware and experiencing is terribly limited. So the obvious next step: realise that we evolved in an environment, we’re adapted and continue to adapt to that environment, that the whole point of science is just to continue that adaptation. Therefore eventually scientists will invent devices, the output of which can’t be experienced—all they can do is change a person’s behaviour to make them more (or less) adapted to the environment.
Journals and conferences will become more interesting, since graphs and equations won’t be about the measured phenomena. They’ll be about how people’s behaviour is changed once they’re plugged into a machine for detecting the phenomena.
So in a sense the output of these new and exciting devices that don’t yet exist will be experienced, but only in terms of, for example, better avoidance of buses when out and about on one’s bike, and more sex.
I’d like to write a book where the phenomena is this: there’s some kind of Bayesian bubbly aura around all particles. The world actually is a physical belief net and does the computations for us—all we have to do is build a device that reads off the results.