I dislike generalization but specialization is what becomes the trend nowadays.
Its either a ontological pursuit , a pschochologism, or a profession of mathematical analysis, usually lumped together for others to untangle.
How close to specifications can formerly irreduced quantities can be said to equal to the next numerically significant marker?
Marks on paper are vastly different then the ideas represented there, and even A1 suffers from lack of certain demarcations in that regard.
Ideally, it must be admitted that there are limits that absolutely will prohibit any conclusively quantifiable infinite progression, when science entails the opposite: as an integrate of all sets.
That said, the search goes on for the ultimately reduced quantifiable particle, the so called god-particle.
So named appropriately , but that uncertain absolute is totally identical and not merely relatively so, with the idea of ‘God’.
Yet trillions will be spent , in the name of progress, an engine that resembles more a run-away train that can not be stopped.
But the quest can not be given up for different philosophical reasons then say, the proposition that it is merely to stop-gap the force needed to be applied so that once a body is set in motion, an opposite and equal force needs to be applied to stop it.
That is what pure psychology demands to prevent the ultimate collapse of conscious awareness itself.
The investment requires return, other wise even the philosophical implications will be negated.
And no one goes for that.