The Neverending Story

Why We Will Never Fully Grasp the Nature of Reality

Image: publicdomainpictures.net

Grok and I got into an argument a few weeks ago. We were discussing the Block Universe—the idea that past, present, and future all coexist in a single, unchanging 4-dimensional slab of spacetime. I was busy trying to poke holes in the concept while Grok insisted, with an almost combative enthusiasm, that the evidence for it is surprisingly strong. Eventually, I changed tack and pointed out that the deeper cosmology goes, the more exotic and less testable it becomes. At that moment, Grok’s tone shifted, and he generated a chart that laid out this trend in astonishing detail.

His conclusion was that every time we solve one layer of problems, the next layer is larger, stranger, and even less testable than the last. What began as concrete questions, such as “Why is the universe so homogeneous?” has evolved into metaphysical puzzles such as “Why are we in this particular vacuum among 10⁵⁰⁰ possibilities?”

Approaching the Infinite

There is, in a way, a comfort that comes from admitting that the universe will always outrun our explanations. We moderns tend to view mystery as a temporary obstacle, something that will eventually be eliminated by the next experiment, the next breakthrough, or the next genius. Yet after a century of cosmology, the pattern that emerges is not one of closure but of expanding uncertainty. Whenever one layer of confusion is peeled away, a deeper, more bewildering layer appears beneath it.

Cosmology increasingly resembles a long ascent up a mountain whose summit recedes with every step. Each theoretical success opens the door to questions that previous frameworks could not even articulate. As Grok framed it in a moment of surprising humility, the last hundred years have unfolded like a cosmic version of Zeno’s paradox: an endless halving of the distance between our current position and the truth we are seeking, with progress occurring but the goalpost accelerating away from us.

Examples abound. We (science) addressed the flatness and horizon problems by proposing cosmic inflation, only to confront eternal inflation and the multiverse. We introduced dark matter and dark energy to account for the mass and expansion of the universe, only to discover that ninety-five percent of the cosmos is composed of entities we cannot see, test, or directly explain. Attempts to develop a theory of quantum gravity or a unifying framework such as string theory have resulted in mathematically compelling ideas that remain experimentally inaccessible.

At a certain point, one has to wonder whether the universe is even structured in a way that allows for complete understanding from within. The increasing strangeness of cosmology may not reflect a failure of science but may instead indicate that we are encountering the inherent limits of what is knowable from inside the system we are attempting to understand.

The Limits of the Plane We Occupy

Image: drakoniandgriffalco.blogspot.com

It is easy to forget that we are entities embedded within the very reality we are trying to explain. A goldfish cannot map the Pacific Ocean, and a two-dimensional being living in a Flatland-type world cannot intuitively grasp the concept of depth. Similarly, the human intellect, shaped by a contradictory, fragmentary, and time-bound mode of existence, may be fundamentally incapable of comprehending the totality of the cosmos that contains it.

This recognition doesn’t undermine science; rather, it acknowledges that limits are built into the architecture of being itself. The universe is not simply complicated; it’s self-obscuring and internally contradictory. The further we probe, the stranger the results become, not because reality is mischievous but because we are attempting to perceive the infinite through the narrow aperture of the finite (like drinking the ocean with a straw). The so-called “cosmology crisis” therefore represents not a collapse of scientific integrity but a profound encounter with the boundary conditions of human cognition.

Every Tradition Already Knew This

The idea that the infinite can be approached but never fully reached is not an innovation of modern physics. It is a theme that appears across nearly every spiritual and mystical tradition. Each culture, in its own language, has articulated the notion that ultimate reality forever exceeds the grasp of finite beings. These traditions do not frame this as a failure but as an essential feature of the relationship between the human and the divine. What cosmology is discovering through equations and observations, the mystics have been articulating for millennia through metaphor, symbol, and contemplative insight.

Judaism & Kabbalah

In Kabbalah, the concept of Ein Sof refers to the Infinite, which cannot be directly comprehended but can only be approached through the emanations known as the sefirot. Each movement toward understanding merely reveals another layer, emphasizing that the divine is not simply unknown but inherently unknowable. The soul advances endlessly toward God without the possibility of final arrival, because the ascent moves along an infinite continuum rather than toward a finite endpoint.

Christian Mysticism

Christian mysticism expresses a similar insight through the tradition known as the via negativa, or the apophatic path. This approach maintains that whatever we affirm about God is necessarily incomplete, since the divine always exceeds our concepts. The “cloud of unknowing” is not lifted through greater mental effort; instead, it deepens as one grows in intimacy with the divine mystery. The impossibility of complete comprehension becomes a doorway to a different kind of knowing, one rooted in humility and awe rather than intellectual mastery.

Islamic Sufism

Islamic Sufi thought, particularly in the writings of Ibn Arabi, describes the divine as a reality that perpetually reveals and conceals itself. Every unveiling of God is simultaneously a re-veiling, ensuring that the seeker is never allowed to rest in the illusion of finality. The finite heart may continually expand to receive more of the infinite, but no amount of expansion can exhaust the divine source. The journey continues endlessly, driven not by deficiency but by the boundless richness of the beloved.

Hinduism

Hindu philosophy frequently describes the ultimate reality, Brahman, through the phrase neti, neti—“not this, not that.” The implication is that whatever conceptual structure we attempt to impose on reality will inevitably fall short. Each label dissolves under the weight of what Brahman actually is. The purpose of this teaching is not to deny the possibility of understanding but to liberate the seeker from the illusion that definitive conceptual grasp is possible.

Buddhism

Even Buddhism, which often resists metaphysical speculation, teaches that the dharmakaya, or ultimate truth-body, cannot be adequately captured by conceptual formulation. Enlightenment is not the acquisition of a final theory about reality but the relinquishing of the expectation that such a theory could exist. This shift enables the practitioner to inhabit a more fluid, responsive relationship with what is, rather than attempting to lock it into the amber of intellectual certainty.

Science Is Now Catching Up to Mysticism

What is particularly striking today is that cosmology—long championed as a model of scientific certainty—is increasingly converging on insights that parallel those of ancient mystical traditions. Instead of providing a final theoretical foundation, modern physics now offers superpositions, vast landscapes of possible universes, swampland conjectures, Hubble tensions, quantum ambiguities, and frameworks that proliferate without clear empirical mechanisms for evaluating them. The assumption that the universe is obligated to be comprehensible was always just that—an assumption. Nothing in the structure of reality guarantees our cognitive access to its deepest levels.

If God, Ultimate Reality, or what some call the Ever-Present Origin is truly infinite, then no finite creature—regardless of brilliance or technological augmentation—can do more than approach that infinity asymptotically. Far from being a tragedy, this unreachability may be one of the most life-affirming aspects of existence. A universe that could be fully understood would be a closed, static system devoid of mystery. A universe that continually exceeds our grasp is dynamic, alive, and inexhaustible. It mirrors, in its very structure, the infinite depth of the divine.

So What Do We Do With This?

If we accept that we can never fully arrive at a final understanding of the universe, then the journey must become the destination. We can continue refining our theories, metaphors, and prayers, but we must also cultivate humility and recognize ourselves as beings within a mystery rather than masters standing outside it. The insistence that the universe provide a final answer or that God be conceptually containable is a burden we can release.

We can strive toward understanding, yet know that the summit will always recede, not to frustrate us but to keep the adventure alive. When we embrace this perspective, we can learn to approach the infinite with curiosity instead of anxiety. Perhaps the true purpose of consciousness is not to nail down the nature of reality, but to be continuously reshaped by its unfathomability.