Some possibilities may just be too complex to process and/or elaborate in real time. Some theories of String Theory, for example, entail that solutions or answers to certain questions must exist, but are calculationally intractible. So although imagination may point to the existence of such answers, it may not be capable of providing them. Examples and explanations of this phenomenon can be found in Joseph Conlon, Why String Theory?

https://www.routledge.com/Why-String-Theory/Conlon/p/book/9781482242478

Thank you for sharing it.

The string theory seems to challenge and transcend the visible and invisible spheres of knowledge, broadening the capacity of imagination. However, since there is not yet experimental evidence, the reliability and accuracy of the theory are not tangible and fully grounded realities. Since the string theory explores the conceptual layer of knowledge, where the borderline of the visible is crossed by the power of the invisible, even existing answers are challenging to materialize. Nonetheless, I think that under certain scientific circumstances or groundbreaking methodologies, this theory may become evidence-based, showcasing its experimental value and credibility.

Dear Amalya Sukiasyan

If there are limits, there is not imagination. If there are limits, there is no imagination.

Imagination has no limits, but those who imagine do have them (intellectual, emotional, physical, sentimental...)

I hope this helps.

Dear Félix Oscar Socorro Márquez, thank you for your response. I agree that imagination has no limits, but only in terms of imagining, not realizing. For instance, one can imagine living in the 18th century, but in reality, it is bound by imagination and does not go beyond it to become reality.

Dear Amalya Sukiasyan

Imagination has no limits, reality does. Your question was about the limits of the imagination.

There are two types of imagination: utopian and visionary. Utopian imagination cannot transform reality, it only idealizes it. Visionary imagination is capable of developing the technology that will make it possible. The latter also has limits, it depends on the knowledge and advances in equipment that one possesses. For example, men imagined flying (on their own) for years, and only in 2016 did it become possible. Do you see the difference?

I hope this helps.

Dear Félix Oscar Socorro Márquez, imagination must interact with the constraints of reality to be meaningful. As Colin Wilson said, "Imagination should be used, not to escape reality, but to create it." Utopian imagination is indeed directed at the impossible, while visionary imagination aims at enhancing the borders of reality.

That is just what I have said, dear Amalya Sukiasyan. It seems you already have an answer to your question and are looking for validation. And, yes, Wilson stated that about imagination, that is his opinion, not a rule or a law. You can use your imagination as you wish, when you want and how you want to do it, it is your imagination.

Dear Félix Oscar Socorro Márquez, yes, it's Wilson's opinion, just as your statements reflect your perspectives, not a rule or law. I value all opinions about my perspectives. However, before being posted, my answers undergo a process of self-validation. A person can use one's imagination as one wishes, as long as it doesn't cause harm to oneself, communities, or society.

One's imagination is constrained by the concepts at one's disposal, one's language, and one's cognitive skills. One might overcome these to a small degree, but not everything is possible for an individual. I don't imagine [sic, ha ha] most of us can imagine our way into M-theory or p-branes and contribute to their further development. And the nature and point of the intentionality-with-a-t/intensionality-with-an-s distinction would be beyond the imaginative powers of a rainforest tribe. Anyway, the eventual Big Crunch will foreclose any remaining-to-be-imagined possibilites. Tempus omnia vincit.

Thank you for your response. I agree that imagination, like knowledge, isn't demonstrated at the same level in everyone. For instance, in the 19th century, society was largely against technological innovations. As Henry Ford said, "If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses." So, the societal imagination was somewhat limited, becoming a barrier to advancement. While Henry Ford's individual imagination was more powerful than the collective imagination, it brought revolutionary changes.

Imagination, though boundless in spirit, is not entirely without limits. In my perspective, its boundaries arise from several interrelated factors:

That said, imagination’s true strength lies not in its infinite range, but in its ability to transcend the ordinary within the constraints of the real. Its limits are not fixed walls, but evolving frontiers that we continually push through curiosity, empathy, and collaboration.

Thank you for your insights. Imagination is indeed boundless. Metaphorically speaking, it's infinite—like an ocean, full of the epistemic waves of knowledge, the tropical islands of reason, and the transformative ships of courage. It's a form of creative thinking without the constraints of logic. Despite being boundless, imagination, like any neuro-cognitive power, has its limits. It can be limited by the walls of narrow-mindedness, drastic lack of creativity, and an insufficient level of intellectual appreciation.

In his iconic song Imagine, John Lennon sees imagination as a world-changing tool, which, despite its limits, can transform the human condition, turning ontological challenges into existential victories. He calls humanity to believe in a better world, where equality, peace, and eternal values shape transcendental consciousness, bringing meaning, kindness, and intellectual illumination.