Scientific Research Makes Life Better Even You Don’t Understand It

For the past few years, I have grown a variety of peppers in my garden. I use them to make a pepper sauce. The sauce has to age for one year in the dark corner of our pantry. I don’t necessarily understand it, and it may seem trivial. However, it’s just better when it comes time to shower them over a batch of collard greens. Science is like that too. We may not understand all of the motivation, words, experiments, and topics, but basic scientific research just makes life better.

This essay was inspired by a comment on social media, which implied that if scientific research was not applied or essential, then it has no value. In 2014 Liz Karagianis wrote something that needs a signal boost today. She said, “Why pursue basic research simply for the sake of curiosity, discovery, knowledge, when applied research specifically tackles the world’s biggest problems––poverty, energy, disease, or building new businesses to boost the economy? Faculty say it’s because basic research is the process of creation, and without it, applications vanish.”

Writing in an issue of MIT Spectrum, Karagianis went on to point out that GPS, which you will likely used today, benefited from a hydrogen maser. What’s that? It is a type of atomic clock and is central to how GPS works. Professor Emeritus Dan Kleppner who was involved in some that early work admits that his team did foresee their work leading to satellite-based global positioning systems.

Insulin is another scientific marvel that was not planned. Two researchers in the 1880s were investigating how the pancreas contributes to digestion. They took a pancreas out of dog, and flies swarmed around the canine urine. That was a clue that sugar content was high. They had actually given the dog diabetes. A few decades later further research and development discovered that insulin is produced by the pancreas. Surprise R&D breakthroughs like Penicillin and X-Rays are further documented on the Xprize.org website.

My point is that scientific research that leads to applications does not always follow a recipe, flowchart or business plan. Discovery, mistakes, “do overs,” and replication are essential to basic research. Raise your virtual hand if you took any type of medication yesterday. That pill didn’t appear out of “medical fairy land.” There were years of R&D on molecules, cell biology, enzymes and other things you probably don’t understand or that might seem frivolous without proper context. Basic research is a cornerstone of discovery, even if it seems wasteful or trivial from our narrow perspectives.

As a life lesson, I often remind my kids to expand their radius. What do I mean? The area of a circle is found by multiplying Pi by the square of radius. Since Pi doesn’t change, the area of a circle is increased by expanding the radius. I told my kids that by expanding their radius of experiences, perspectives, travel destinations, and viewpoints it will increase their area of understanding.

How does that lesson apply to this discussion? Let’s say you stumble upon an article or news story about research on angular momentum. A narrow radius of perspective might lead you to conclude that research is wasteful or a meaningless science project. An expanded perspective might prompt you consider that research might lead to a more efficient irrigation system for farmers or a new impact resistant seat in an automobile. Who knows?

In science communication, we often target messaging for the public at about the eighth-grade level. Let’s face it, science classes were not always the most popular ones in high school. Scientific literacy, personal biases, and a barrage of information from unsubstantiated but accessible information (blogs, You Tube, or social media “echo chambers”) shape contemporary perspectives on science. Science, technology, engineering, and math experts must broadly engage and move beyond the comfort zones of the ivory tower. Your aunt or neighbor probably doesn’t read the scientific journals or go to technical conferences. Broader engagement is needed to explain the “so what” of why research matters and to counter misinformation or disinformation. The Academy must also remove barriers that disincentivize scholars from engaging.

Today, STEM research crosses, intermingles or works with social, behavioral, health and humanities disciplines too. Just this week, a new review paper that I was a co-author on was published. The topic was heat-related risks associated with maternal and fetal health. I am an atmospheric scientist by training and never had publishing in medical journals on my career bingo card. However, challenges we face today will require multiple disciplines working together at times. It will still require those studies that may have odd names and levels of complexity that we may not understand.

The true irony is that many social media comments about frivolous science or basic STEM R&D are made on a cell phone. These ubiquitous devices actually evolved from basic research on physics, circuitry, electrons, heat transfer, and artificial intelligence. Our lives are better today because of medicines, GPS, and yes, even cell phones.