Science and art are both tools of inquiry meant to pose and investigate questions. Often the results of creative inquiry bear more questions, further discourse, and propel cultural discussion. In this way, science and art are very similar. Where they digress is in their emphasis on reproducibility. Where science aims to be perpetually reproducible, the infinite potential of art often relies on the idiosyncratic cultural production of its creators. This, of course, isn’t always the case, especially in our technique-fetishist contemporary art culture, where the cult of newness chases cultural constructions from technique to technique in pursuit of new culture. But examining the differences between art and science is not what’s interesting here, but what they have in common. Art and science are both languages, complete with a history and context, for communicating and preserving ideas across distance and time. A touchstone for preserving what is useful and sublime.