|
|
Post by ironhold on Aug 31, 2014 0:42:58 GMT
A few weeks back, I mentioned the exchange I had with someone who tried to argue that only scientists can do science and that anyone who isn't a scientist should just shut up.
Well, I went ahead and did an installment of my weekly column on that very argument and my efforts to show that anyone can do science.
In order to reinforce this, I'm looking to do a follow-up installment about scientific discoveries that were made by accident.
So far, I have:
*Radar technician Percy Spencer discovering microwave cooking when a candy bar in his pocket melted while he was working with a magnetron.
*Sir Alexander Fleming discovering penicillin after noticing that a bacteria sample he had failed to properly seal had grown a type of mold that was killing the bacteria.
Anyone know of any other scientific discoveries that were made by accident or under unusual circumstances? I've got enough of a word count left for one story.
Thanks.
|
|
|
|
Post by GTCGreg on Aug 31, 2014 5:20:30 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by ironhold on Aug 31, 2014 21:19:57 GMT
Thanks.
I'm going with the microwave and penicillin for this first column; once I ran through my conclusion I hit my word count without needing a third item.
However, the senior editor has been looking at increasing the amount of "educational" content in the paper to go along with our participating in "Newspapers In Education", and so I'll be filing these others away for later.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cybermortis on Sept 1, 2014 1:02:33 GMT
You might want to look into the history of 'science' overall. Many aspects of science were developed or invented not by 'scientists' but by fairly wealthy individuals who had the time and inclination to experiment in their spare time - of which they had a lot.
Indeed a lot of inventions in the 1800's and earlier were stumbled across by members of the British clergy. The same actually holds for medicine - a fair amount of modern medicine has its roots in 1700 and 1800's surgeons (who didn't have a medical degree, or for that matter any degree) who applied what we would consider to be modern testing procedures. Something the Doctors of that period considered suspect at best - 'empirical' was short hand for 'scam'.
I don't know enough off the top of my head to give specifics - certainly not enough for an article - but it is something worth looking into if you are asked to write something longer on the subject of science.
|
|
|
|
Post by silverdragon on Sept 8, 2014 9:25:45 GMT
Documentation, Documentation, documentation....
The lament of my Programming teacher when I first learnt programming.
The difference between messing about and science is writing it down.
The true definition of Science is how you record it.
And then, was it worth the doing....
For example, a Tax Payers expense in recent history in UK was research into why Cornflakes go soggy when you add the Milk?...
Phwatt?... Phwhyy?....
Non Scientist, definition of Cornflake, DRIED corn paste rolled out into random shapes.
If its DRIED and you add moisture, what were you expecting?...Gold dust?....
|
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Sept 8, 2014 15:31:27 GMT
Documentation, Documentation, documentation.... The lament of my Programming teacher when I first learnt programming. The difference between messing about and science is writing it down. The true definition of Science is how you record it. And then, was it worth the doing.... For example, a Tax Payers expense in recent history in UK was research into why Cornflakes go soggy when you add the Milk?... Phwatt?... Phwhyy?.... Non Scientist, definition of Cornflake, DRIED corn paste rolled out into random shapes. If its DRIED and you add moisture, what were you expecting?...Gold dust?.... dried and baked. if you add moisture to dried baked mud it does not go soggy... I'd guess that the side of the experiment they are not telling you about is figuring out what ingredient they could mix in to the corn to make the flakes NOT go soggy so quickly - while not killing off their customer base. |
|
