The difference between science and philosophy lies mainly on the fact that more often than not, science deals with finite things while philosophy deals with the infinite.
In mathematics, they have accepted the fact that there is no rational way of writing the square root of three. There is no way of writing it as a fraction with coprime numerators and denominators. That is why they chose to call it irrational. However, in philosophy, the fact that some things cannot be explained or given a particular and logical explanation must be pondered upon. That is why there is no end to thoughts.
Also, in counting irrational numbers, there will always be an irrational number between two irrational numbers. Mathematicians readily accepted the fact that it is uncountably infinite (unlike rationals which has a systematic way of listing). In life, only when the surface is scratched will one realize that there is more. The next layer shows that there is still more, and more, and more, and indefinitely more. That is why thinking does not end. That is why it cannot be universalized.
It is not that science and mathematics has given up on the infinite, but they chose to give it a name- irratinals for this case.
The reason why scientists can replicate an experiment is because an oxygen atom will always be of atomic number 16 (except for isotopes). However, if the 16 ranged values from 1 to 118, there would be no way of arranging these elements in the periodic table. In life, each relationship varies with different types of people who have different perpectives in life. Each one is existing in a unique manner, despite the unity of being a being. Since it is personal, and there are infinitely many cases here, it cannot be universalized.
The main point here is that writing down a formula for philosophy or life is as futile as trying to systematically list down all irrational numbers.
