Art and science aren't as different as they might seem.
Human experience has a paradox to it. We exist at the same time both inside and outside our heads.
Outside, because everything we do depends on the external world. All the interesting stuff is "out there": scenic destinations, sensory entertainment, the endless surprise of other people.
Inside, because we only have access to the outside when it comes inside our heads. Information flows in, and from it our minds create a model of the world. But it's a model, a replica. We experience the real thing milliseconds after it happens – like a batter needs to direct their swing where they think the ball will be.
The obvious difference: Science deals with numbers, which describe relationships outside. Art deals with feelings, which describe relationships inside.
But both deal with the unknown. Every artist is trying to create something new. Sometimes the thing that's new is the tiny improvement of a form they've executed a thousand times. Maybe the new thing is the feeling of this time.
A less obvious difference: art values time. Science takes as long as it takes to achieve a result, 10 minutes or 10 years or 10 lifetimes. An artist has to balance how much time they spend on any given work.
In fact, you could describe the whole of art as deciding where and where not to spend time. By this definition, there's an art to everything, including science.
Since we only get one life, time is the quality we understand the least. Art explores meaning through time the same way science studies reality through measurement.