The point is we aren't inventing anything. We are learning all the time about what has already been invented. We use science to learn and explain. Each step through the labyrinth takes us to new information. In some ways we are relearning what people hundreds and thousands of years before us learned.
I think your definition of invention is a bit spurious.
In some ways we find out that, hundreds and thousands of years ago, one person out of millions had a particularly keen insight, and it spread. But to do this, we also have to sort the wheat from the chaff. That's what science does.
How are we communicating?
A thousand or so years ago, someone created something that could be called a battery. Nothing came of it, and nothing could come of it. It was weak even by the standards of batteries when they were 'reinvented'. To say nothing of the chemical research over the past century that has enabled modern mobile technology.
A thousand or so years before that, someone came up with a set of codified rules for logic. Other people, various elements of math. Newton built upon these, Gauss on them. Does that make the Fourier transform - the equation behind every single .jpg image you see on the Internet - any less inventive?
I can't be content with the thought that there is nothing new and nothing more than what we think there is. We don't know everything or even what the everything could be. We constantly walk up to walls and tell ourselves we've reached the end instead of reaching out to touch the wall and seeing that it's only a beginning.
You are confusing the palette with what can be painted with it.
And heck - what we have isn't exactly that, even. Quantum Mechanics and Relativity are not our 'palette', per se, but rather descriptions that we can occasionally refine - we don't know Quantum Mechanics or Relativity the way we know 'red' and 'blue' are a certain range of wavelengths. Rather, we know them by how they bound our Universe. There are many potential ways by which this may be occurring, and there are some rather mind-boggling possibilities involved.
Their purview is not unlimited. Most obviously by the fact that they don't touch - there is something between them. We know this. We know there is another 'color' there. We see its effects in things such as black holes, and they are profound observations on their own.
And yet, at the same time, we don't. Throw too many particles into the equation (i.e. more than two) and the effects of these 'bounds' are ridiculously hard to compute.
I don't think I need to convince you that the complexity doesn't stop there. From this basic palette of fundamental universal equations and constants, we get others, such as orbital mechanics and chemistry.
And we're still studying Solar System formation. We're still doing chemical and materials research even on the most basic levels - I've heard metallurgists go on rants
about how under-studied most types of steel are. Just steel. Forget every other alloy we can make. We do these studies because running the equations from basic quantum mechanical principles... just is not going to happen.
And then we go into biology. Millions of CPU hours go into analyzing a single millisecond of a single protein
You said in another thread "I refuse to believe that I can be predicted with 100% accuracy."
There are groups of transhumanists who believe that such a thing as perfect brain uploading will one day be possible.
There is a reason people with more understanding of biochemistry, at their nicest, often think of said groups as naive.
All of these things, though - they're not what we've created. These are just discoveries. Poking at the Universe through every possible method we can think of, with every possible tool, to get a better description of it. So we can make better tools. And these are really our true creation - an ever-evolving toolbox with which we can paint and draw and write and sculpt and swim and dig and fly and...
There are so many colors for us to paint with. To create with.
You put your foot in the ground and, despite not wanting to paint with the overwhelming vast majority of colors currently known, or to discover ones in spaces where we haven't looked hard enough yet, you choose to believe in a completely different color, tangential to and outside of every color currently known.
I can't stop you from believing so, of course.
It is, however, a dead end. It's not a real color. There are no paintings to be made with it. No genuine creations to be made. Not even discovering new combinations of colors by combining it with something we already know.
It's sad, because there is so much to
be made. To be painted, to be done, created. Humanity hasn't done a trillionth of what it is capable of.
It's sad, because however tiny any actual creation these days seems to be in the face of all that has already been done - every genuine addition is itself a beautiful thing.
It's sad, because so much of humanity seems to be in this very same rut. That they feel they can't actually add anything more.
The sum total of human achievement is a tower reaching brick by brick for the stars. Billions have been laid by those that came before me, each and every single one a labor of love by those who placed it. I realize that what I can add to this already colossal structure is insignificant in comparison to the grand whole.
This is fine. I can take pride enough in being a part of it, and craft and place my contributions as best I can, because they will have to support a great deal of weight.
In the mean time, though, I can certainly appreciate what others I can observe are doing.
I would like to see what you add to, if you choose to.