You are not aware of the fact that there are things you do not know?
You must know everything then.
. . .
There's a subtle difference.
Consider "things that you don't know (options that did not unfold to yourself)" and "options that did not unfold (at all)".
That universe which can be experienced are the options that did unfold.
That which did not unfold is one huge problem when doing statistical calculus on that which is observed, because it is an illusory, infinite many which bites the assumptions of statistics (it is the options that within the model could have been but haven't, so it's an imaginative many).
Now even if we take these three types of experience:
a. That which unfolds to what you assume as yourself ("you know")
b. That which unfolds to what you assume as anybody else but not yourself ("you do not know, but somebody knows")
c. That which unfolds to nobody. ("nobody knows")
Could there be anything that is told or experienced about that which unfolds to nobody? Does any of the scientifically proven phenomena fall into that latter category?
Wouldn't that only work in some illusory model, where you construct something that has been seen but all the seers died out?
In that case, what could be told about such a world, or who was there to see it?
If we partition further down:
Imagine something that has been seen.
But even though seers are still there it is no longer seen.
Would science say such a thing still exists, or would it consider it extinct?
Now what is extinct?
If the object of the seeing is no longer there, you consider it extinct.
If the subject of the seeing is no longer there, you proclaim probably there still is something that nobody can see anymore. A hypothesis which can never be proven.
But if seer and the seen are a dependently arising effect as "seeing", what that is seen could possibly remain once the seers are all gone?
And when we honor the fact that everything we have ever seen came about as an object of seeing?
One might say the seen to be there without anybody be able to see it is religious belief since there cannot be any proof.
If you add to that picture, that dimensionality and time are scales that come into existence because of the functioning of our sensation, and therefrom one concludes there is only the now, that every"thing" folds into pure seeing. Since time itself is an effect of observation, when all seers are gone, there is no time.
Who would read the instrument?