It raises the question of our biological capabilities; we can do
   what we can do and we can know what we're capable of knowing. We
   can develop machines to particularly overtime our limitations
   and we can go quite far with it, but is there a theoretical
   ending point? Where all that could be known is known with our
   current biological limitations?

   I suppose it's not something really to worry about; but as a
   "What if?" it's interesting.

   Imagining far into an unimaginable future makes me step back and
   ask, "What might we be missing... *today*?"

   There are studies being done in many areas... but I think some
   of the greatest breakthroughs that are humanity changing may
   come from areas that "don't fit" well currently or are
   considered unstudiable. What makes something unstudiable may not
   be the subject matter being "wrong" but that the methodology
   isn't robust enough yet to entirely handle the unstudyable
   thing.

   It's why I try to challenge assumptions, even if I sound
   ridiculous at times. I pick on science and mathematics a lot
   because we place a lot of trust in them, and just as court
   systems and police departments (administers of justice and law)
   have internal investigations into procedures... so too I think
   it's important to always have those who question assumptions
   that are at an annoyingly deep level; not to overturn them, but
   to point out weak spots that could be strengthened.