Art > Science

Art is superior to science. Not my words. I read somewhere that if Michael Jackson did not write Billy Jean for example, no one would. Or if Monet did not paint The Water Lily Pond, one of my favorites, no one would. Whereas in science, if Newton did not conclude the laws of gravity, someone else would have come to the same conclusion. While science is observed, art is created. And that is why Art is superior, it argues.

This thought has possessed me ever since. Too quickly we have discarded art for not being universal. But once you realize that art lives outside the matrix, that art is a window to new worlds and realities, everything changes. The power of art lies in its subjectivity.

No two original art pieces are the same, ever. It reminds me of us humans. No two lives are the same. And it goes deeper than that.

Inspecting Minkowski’s spacetime diagrams, used to visualize the 4^th dimension and special relativity in physics, we observe that a graph is perceived differently depending on the observer. The observer moves along a unique graph, labelled “worldline”, which alters their perception of other graphs depending on the space and time coordinates relative to the speed of light. Light. Let there be light…

Anyways, bottom line: Two observers, differentiated by their worldlines, perceive one and the same thing differently. And both perceptions are correct.

And such is art. Art moves through spacetime, while natural sciences are bound to the 3d physical world to exist. Somehow, art operates in the 4^th dimension. The art we see in the 3d world exists simultaneously differently within every observer, unfolding alternate worldlines for the graph of the art. Art is a frame into higher dimensions, to say the least.