I’m reading this for my English class right now. In all honesty “timeless” is a perfectly acceptable word for what you are referring to. I think what would help is if you expanded this idea into more than a word. To fully illustrate the perpetual, constant, enduring, impending consequence of the ever-present, ever-expanding possibilities within the realm of biotechnology (I laced that with too many adjectives on purpose, ha), you should describe it’s timelessness as a concept, not a state of being. Does that make sense?
I think the quality of timelessness is what makes most great novels… great. I used this idea in a paper I wrote recently, to introduce the novel and my thesis -
There is a unique quality shared by all beloved books, as can be seen by the novels that cover the lists of required reading through grade school and permeate the discussions of college classrooms. Each of them gives the reader something to relate to, whether it is an age, a place, a character, or even an idea. While reading such novels, which because of this unique quality may be from any era, the reader is able to connect to and understand information previously unknown to them. The best of these books allow the reader to grow and learn through the experiences of the characters regardless of their level of experience in the themes presented. A paradigm of this ideal is The Unbearable Lightness of Being by Milan Kundera, as can be seen by authenticity and truth presented by the relationships of the author’s four main characters.
I suppose, putting Frankenstein (the novel) in that paragraph instead, the quality which makes the book timeless or able to relate to could be (as from your perspective) it’s exploration of biotechnology.
I’m not sure if everything I’ve said is entirely coherent (it makes sense to me, but not necessarily to everyone else as well), so please, if you have any questions, don’t hesitate to ask.