The preeminent sociologist Robert Merton (Calhoun, 2003) popularized the phrase serendipity for unintentional and beneficial discoveries (Campa, 2008). Yaqub (2018) went further and categorized four types of serendipity (Walpolian, Mertonian, Bushian, Stephanian) and four mechanisms of serendipity (Theory-led, Observer-led, Error-borne, Network-emergent). Yaqub named the types of serendipity after Horace Walpole, Robert Merton, Vannevar Bush, and Paula Stephan, based on their philosophies, quotes, or worldviews. For types of serendipity, Walpolian is a targeted search that solves an unexpected problem, Mertonian is a targeted search that solves the problem via an unexpected path, Bushian is an untargeted search that solves an immediate problem, and Stephanian is an untargeted search that solves a later problem. For mechanisms of serendipity, theory-led is when the discovery is a deviation from theoretical expectations, observer-led is when the observer notices something novel, error-borne is a mistake or failure that has another use, and network-emergent is when a team or group determine an application. Yaqub used Robert Merton’s library and notes for his analysis, and cites many examples of serendipity. Since Yaqub states there are patterns to serendipity, the implication is that serendipity is not random and that there may be factors that encourage or preclude its occurrence. However, the factors that encourage scientific ‘happy accidents’ are yet to be discovered.
Electromagnetics Discovery
In 1820 Ørsted heated a wire using an
electric current, and noticed that every time the current was switched on, a
nearby compass needle was moved. The
compass needle turned at right angles to the wire (Yaqub,
2018).
Ørsted published his work in several journals, in the customary language
of the time, Latin. Ampère (1822) learned of the discovery and wrote
several papers, including a mathematical formula for the behavior. This accidental discovery showed that
magnetism and electricity were related, and led to Maxwell’s Laws of
Electromagnetism (Maxwell,
1865).
Among other things, Maxwell’s laws state that light is a propagating
wave of magnetic and electric fields. In other words, electromagnetic radiation
is coupled electric and magnetic fields, travelling as waves at the speed of
light. A moving electric current will
induce a magnetic field; and a moving magnetic field will induce an electric current. This is the basis for all radio frequency
(RF) systems; that radio frequency systems are waves travelling at the speed of
light with magnetic and electrical components.
Hertz (1887) later proved the existence of
electromagnetic waves (that is to say, non-visible light waves) that moved at
the speed of light. Maxwell and Hertz
essentially created classical electromagnetics.
Classical means non-quantum, as quantum physics introduces other
components. The contribution of quantum
physics is that electromagnetic entities are both waves and particles, and can
have somewhat magical behavior (Snyder,
2019).
Technologies that are an outgrowth of this are radio, satellite
communications, cell phone, telephones, television, telegraph, blue tooth,
computer wireless 802-11, etc. In short,
any wireless communications system is a result of Ørsted’s accidental discovery
and his curiosity.
Ørsted’s happy accident is also the
basis for power generation. All
generators have a moving magnet of sorts to create electricity. Therefore, inventions to add to the list are
hydroelectric dams, coal power plants, nuclear power plants, home generators,
motors, etc. What is interesting is the
lag between the accident and practice.
This is what Yaqub would refer to as a Stephanian serendipitous
discovery (Yaqub,
2018), as the invention was a curiosity,
and the practical applications lagged the discovery. He would also classify it as observer-led
(Ørsted noticed something different), with the inventions more
network-emergent. It is also interesting
to note that once Maxwell and Hertz embraced the idea and added to it, that
others (Bell, Edison, Marconi, Tesla, et al.) almost immediately applied the
theory to practice and created inventions.
X-rays Discovery
Roentgen discovered X-rays by
accident in November 1895. He was
experimenting with early vacuum tubes, and when he covered the tube with heavy
black cardboard, a platinobarium screen nine feet away from the tube started to
glow. He decided there was a new ray
involved for the phenomena, and started experimenting. He called the new ray an X-ray. He discovered that the ray was able to pass
through most substances, but left bones and metals visible. The first
photographic X-ray was a photographic plate of his wife’s hand, with her bones
and wedding ring visible (Röntgen,
1896).
From initial discovery to published paper was seven weeks. Roentgen created a very detailed and elaborate
experimental test plan to confirm the existence of x-rays, and to establish
photographic evidence of them. He
ensured that when he published his work it would be favorably reviewed. The medical community immediately recognized
the value of the discovery; the first x-ray of a broken bone was made in
February 1896. When Roentgen was awarded the Nobel Prize for his discovery, he
reportedly said “I didn’t think, I investigated” (Chodos,
2001).
Besides the application of X-rays for viewing inside the body features,
they have also been used as a therapeutic medicine for cancer and other
autoimmune diseases. Their discovery
also helped fill in a gap on the electromagnetic spectrum. Since x-rays are beyond visible light, this
implies that the electromagnetic spectrum does not stop at light, but continues
to other forms. As the happy accident
resulted in immediate applications, this is what Yaqub would refer to as a
Bushian serendipitous discovery (Yaqub,
2018).
He would also classify it as observer-led, as Roentgen noticed something
different. One could argue that Roentgen
understood the implications of his discovery, but it could also be classified
as network-emergent mechanism.
Conclusion
It is interesting how many scientific
discoveries are accidental, and I am intrigued by the concept that there may be
a pattern to encourage it. One
interesting point is that curiosity seemed to be the impetus for both of these
discoveries. The other point is that the
discoveries were published in reputable journals, so that others could review
and determine what applications could arise.
I also agree with Narayanamurti
and believe that to find more serendipitous discoveries we need to focus on
finding novel questions and novel answers (Narayanamurti,
2022).
Of note, the comment from Paula Stephens that caused Yaqub to name a
serendipity type after her is to find answers to questions not yet posed (Yaqub,
2018).
The concept of looking for questions, or looking for unexpected answers
is the basis for scientific research.
References
Ampère, A.-M. (1822). Recueil d'observations électro-dynamiques: contenant divers mémoires,
notices, extraits de lettres ou d'ouvrages périodiques sur les sciences,
relatifs à l'action mutuelle de deux courans électriques, à celle qui existe
entre un courant électrique et un aimant ou le globe terrestre, et à celle de
deux aimans l'un sur l'autre. Chez Crochard.
Calhoun, C. (2003). Robert K. Merton remembered. Footnotes, 31(3). https://www.asanet.org/sites/default/files/savvy/footnotes/mar03/indextwo.html
Campa, R. (2008). Making science by serendipity: a
review of Robert K. Merton and Elinor Barber’s" The travels and adventures
of serendipity". Journal of
Evolution and Technology, 17(1), 75-83. https://jetpress.org/v17/campa.htm
Chodos, A. (2001). This month in physics history,
November 8, 1895: Roentgen's discovery of X-Rays. American Physical Society News, 10(10). https://www.aps.org/publications/apsnews/200111/history.cfm
Hertz, H. R. (1887). On electromagnetic effects
produced by electrical disturbances in insulators. Berlin Academy, Wiedmann’s Ann, 34, 273.
Maxwell, J. C. (1865). VIII. A dynamical theory of the
electromagnetic field. Philosophical
Transactions of the Royal Society of London, 155, 459-512. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstl.1865.0008
Narayanamurti, V. (2022). Technoscientific research: A
missing term in R&D discourse. Perspectives.
https://www.nationalacademies.org/news/2022/01/technoscientific-research-a-missing-term-in-r-d-discourse
Röntgen, W. C. (1896). On a new kind of rays. Science, 3(59), 227-231. https://www.jstor.org/stable/1623595
Snyder, D. (2019). Spooky action at a distance is not
spooky-it is knowledge: Combining entanglement and negative observation to show
how The Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen experiment works, not just how it doesn’t work.
Bulletin of the American Physical
Society, 64. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.28269.03042
Yaqub, O. (2018). Serendipity: Towards a taxonomy and a theory. Research Policy, 47(1), 169-179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2017.10.007
