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