My mind is the farthest thing from scientific--so when my thoughts turn to scientific realities, how else can I refer to it than metascience? Surely not metaphysics, which I consider way above my potential.

      Enough with self-effacement. I read an oped by Edward Frenkel, an academic, in today's New York Times suggesting that "the universe is a simulation" created by mathematical formulae: "the possibility of the Platonic nature of mathematical ideas remains -- and may hold the key to understanding our own reality."

     As a humanities person, I know this much: we humans are endowed with very few sense and dimension perceptions and there are many more that we've never conceived of.

      Much exists in these dimensions that we can't pick up: like thriving "civilizations" on these planets we perceive as "dead." The miracle is that we are allowed to persist in our so-limited state. Perhaps these communities conceive of us as "dead"--hopelessly nonexistent and steering ourselves into a more dead state than we are now.

     So we send out telescopes and Latin messages to the farthest reaches of what we perceive as reality in search of life when it's right next door, so to speak. Even on the moon.

     It will take much evolution, if the human species persists in the face of natural and cultural decay, before we acquire the additional sense perceptions to see what we are blind to now.

     Does it take a humanities person to perceive this? I'm sure that scientists will have a lot of refutations to offer.