There is a theory of creativity somewhere -- from Freud via Fritz Kunkel -- that creativity comes from the "preconscious," a kind of psychological "no man's land" between the conscious mind and the unconscious. Scientific creativity comes from that part of the preconscious adjacent to the conscious mind while artistic (and perhaps spiritual ) creativity comes from the part near the unconscious. This suggests that science and spirituality use our minds differently and the combination of spiritual and scientific genius should be exceeding rare.
I was at a memorial service for the friend of Dianne. Atterwards the neurotypicals stood (or sat since many were in wheelchairs) around and chatted so I stared out the window. A moderate breeze was blowing and the trees and branches and leaves were vibrating --dancing. Each leaf seemed to respond in its own individual way. And as I watched one particular leaf as it fluttered harmoniously yet contrarily to its neighbor, I thought of Blakes line about seeing "infinity in a grain of sand and eternity in an hour." That leaf and its interaction with other leaves had me tranfixed.
Later, it occurred to me that using wind velocity and resistance and several other measurable factors, one could provide a mathematical equation that would precisely predict and explain the motion of each leaf at each moment. What a bummer. Do Jeffries and others have too mush of the scientific spirit within them to be good mystical communicators. Do they really not feel the same wonder that poets feel? Or are they constrained by the need to use precise language from expressing that wonder?