Sticky Wicket 1859

An occasional column, in which Caveman and other troglodytes involved in cell science emerge to share their views on various aspects of life-science research. Messages for Mole and other contributors can be left at [email protected]. Any correspondence may be published in forthcoming issues.

What science is for I know all the conventional answers that we tell ourselves and the public. It’s I woke up this morning with a headache. interesting and it can be fun, and the And I was out of coffee. I realized that universe is just so unimaginably strange I’d already missed a meeting that was that we just have to know a little bit indispensable, as it concerned where to about it. Unless, of course, we think too put a table that has been sitting in the much and realize that if all the entranceway of the Department for four information about an infinite universe is months, and I was already late for a infinite, and any amount of something meeting to discuss why we had had the divided by infinity is zero, we not only first meeting so soon. And I can’t find cannot know anything, but we also my other shoe. There’s no way I’m cannot, in principle, exist. Which is going to get to work and not find out that exactly the sort of thing philosophers we’re all out of restriction enzymes, that worry about and scientists don’t. This the experiments aren’t happening, and explains why scientists get significantly those that are are giving results that better offices. Um, where was I? change before they can be written down. It’s one of those days. Oh yes, we know the answers we give to why we do it. But these aren’t the real Which makes me ask the question that I answers. The real answer is much better, ask every now and then (probably less but it’s a secret. It’s sexy and engaging than I should and probably more than I – if the public knew, we would never be should to you, ever-patient reader): why allowed to do it again. We do science do we do this? This science thing and all because we WANT TO RULE THE the baggage that goes with it. WORLD (maniacal laughter). No, sorry, 1860 Journal of Cell Science 116 (10)

I got carried away; that isn’t why we do ‘science in general’, and discovered or Philo Farnsworth, in our society (which science. Okay, it isn’t why most of us do invented (or both) something that we also includes yours), should be the most science, although I’m worried about the absolutely and with the certainty of famous name from the last century. He guy in the office next to mine. hindsight (as an aside, despite did it. He FCTWAWKI. We can forget conventional wisdom, hindsight is not all of last year’s Nobel Laureates (not Here’s the real reason, and it’s still a 20-20; recent studies have shown that it me, of course – I think they’re great, but good one. We do science because of our is slightly nearsighted and has severe it can happen); hey, this guy is the real deep desire to fundamentally change the astigmatism in the left eye) know will thing. He did it: he changed everything. world as we know it. Or, as the pundits completely and permanently change You don’t have to think it’s a good say, FCTWAWKI (they don’t actually society. Once your discovery/invention thing, television, but you do have to say fctwawki, because to do so sounds is really understood and in everyone’s admit that it has changed things. He did like something really disgusting being home, life will never be the same again. it. coughed up, but they do mouth it behind Wow! scientists’ backs while giving each other Philo Farnsworth suffered from severe knowing looks). We want to do Okay, if that ever happened, really, you depression most of his life, and he never something so astoundingly important would become an immortal. You would got any real recognition at all. He wasn’t that it changes everything: the way we achieve that goal that we cannot even famous – or happy. Maybe it was think; the way we look at the world; the admit to ourselves is our deepest goal. because of those awful sit-coms in the way we do things. You’d have to be happy. And famous – 1960s, but I don’t think so. Louis Pasteur, Thomas Edison, Albert I admit it. I want to FCTWAWKI. So do Einstein, Philo Farnsworth… Philo Farnsworth had an idea, and you. We want to see our work in a high- he actually made it work. It wasn’t impact journal (I’ve often thought that, to Who? easy or trivial or done by lots of the public, a high-impact journal must people at the same time – it was his sound a lot like a high-impact road Philo Farnsworth. One of those people baby. And it turned out that it disaster – why would anyone want to be who, in the past 100 years FCTWAWKI. FCTWAWKI, and he watched the world in that?). But yes, we want it. And we watching Laugh-In and the Vietnam want all the newspapers to pick up on it In 1921, Philo Farnsworth had an idea. War in their living rooms. Even if and explain to the public (who are still He made it work successfully in 1927. nobody else knew, he knew that he had worrying about journals being hit by He demonstrated it in 1934 and received done it. fast-moving vehicles) why our work is so the patent in 1935. A company stole it very important and why it FCTWAWKI. from him but then finally paid him some Should that be enough? It’s worth And the small percentage of the royalties. The patents ran out in 1947. In thinking about. Are you doing science to population who read the newspapers will the 1950s the public started to become make a contribution, just for the sake of tell their friends, who will make sure to aware of it in a big way, and in the 1960s making a contribution or for some sort watch it when it’s discussed on the news I personally let it dominate my life (I’ve of recognition, fortune and glory? Do on television or, hopefully, as a news since repented). By the time he died in you think high-impact papers are going bulletin. And if we’re really really going 1971, he had lived to see his invention to make you famous (as my dear mother to FCTWAWKI, we’ll finally see our affecting the lives (for good or ill, but has often said to me, “If you’re so work parodied on The Simpsons. definitely affecting their lives) of famous, how come I’ve never heard of hundreds of millions of people. you?”) or happy? FCTWAWKI, if we think about it, is Arguably, his invention ended a major ultimately what science is for. No, really, war. Today, it is used for education, Sure, there are lots of things we have it could happen. (If you, reading this as undersea and space exploration, to do as scientists that just aren’t the a graduate student, now would be a good communication, medicine and mindless least bit enjoyable. But hopefully time to go do something else. The rest entertainment (except for the halftime the real answer is that for some of us of this essay isn’t for you – you should show of the Superbowl: ‘mindless’ poor twisted souls, science makes us be reading real papers anyway. Then do insults lifeforms without minds). Philo happy all by itself. If not, if you those fabulous experiments you’re Farnsworth invented television. don’t like any of it and are hanging planning that will not only earn you that in there to FCTWAWKI, think about fabulous degree from your fabulous Okay, lets see. One, two, three… okay, it. It might be a good thing to work institution but also FCTWAWKI. ten of you knew who Philo Farnsworth this out for yourself, before you Fabulous. Bye now.) was. Okay, and you even want to argue look back on your career and ask that he didn’t actually invent television, why you aren’t as famous as Philo Just pretend for a moment. Suppose, just because there was this guy in Farnsworth. suppose, that you have worked in Geeksburgh, Scotland who really Mole

isolation, with inspiration and invented it. But you’re all missing the Journal of Cell Science 116, 1859-1860 perspiration (and lots of other ‘ations’) point. Or maybe you got it but you just © 2003 The Company of Biologists Ltd so that credit comes only to you and not think its obvious. doi:10.1242/jcs.00404