Every transmission of information is lossy by necessity, i.e. partly irreversible, and thanks to this fact, new things may still be said and heard
Putting together what jheem has said, and you have just said, in connection with "Turing's dilemma", it helps me to understand what Amemeba may have been getting at in describing her "Cro-magnon" theory of words [again intending no disrespect to Amemeba in abbreviating her theory in this way, in fact, exactly the opposite].
Poets use words as word pictures to communicate ideas and feelings which are not otherwise accessible using words anchored to their strict, technical meanings. In this way, I would agree with you that words can be "lossy" and, in this "lossiness", stretch the boundaries of perception, and, consequently, the boundaries of what is possible, the comprehension of what might be.
Einstein explained that he achieved his greatest insights in visual terms, including his theory of relativity which came to him in the image of a person falling off a roof with the ground rushing up to meet him.
Perhaps we should be paying more attention to the contribution which poets, throughout history [reaching all the way back to Amemeba's "Cro-magnon" wordsmiths], have made to the advancement of science, wseiber. After all, it was William Blake who said "to see the world in a grain of sand".
It is also William Blake whose navigations of the "terra incognita" are seen by some as having prepared the ground for Sigmund Freud and later Carl Jung.
Thank you, all of you, not least Amemeba, for bringing me to this compelling insight.
