Skip to main content

Coincidences in Science

 



Isaac Newton and Gottfried Leibniz both invented the application of mathematics known as calculus. When I say they both did, I don’t mean to imply they worked on it together. They both independently invented calculus. Newton began working on calculus in 1666 but didn’t publish anything about it until 1693. Leibniz began working on it in 1674 but didn’t publish anything about it until 1684. Most people today believe that the two men developed their ideas separately.

Charles Darwin had been working on his theory of evolution for years. He developed the theory in the 1830s but knew it would be controversial so he didn’t tell anyone about it and continued to gather evidence to support his theory. In 1858 Alfred Russell Wallace, an acquaintance of Darwin, sent Darwin a letter outlining a theory of evolution that Russell had come up with. Darwin was shocked. Reportedly some passages were almost word for word the same as Darwin’s. The two men had come up with the same idea.

The reason these things happen are because scientific hypotheses are based on previous knowledge and the latest methods. As methods and equipment evolve and data increases, all scientists who have access to that data could reasonably come to a similar conclusion. Indeed, Newton and Leibniz built on the work of Kepler, Descartes, Pascal, and many others.

Priority is an important concept in science. Priority means: who thought of it first? Who gets the credit? There can be controversy when there are competing claims for a discovery. It can be difficult to determine when each of the competing scientists is responsible for discovering a portion of the puzzle. Both Giovanni Battista Grassi and Ronald Ross discovered important facts about the life cycle of the malarial parasites. There was an ugly fight over who should win the 1902 Nobel prize in Medicine. The Nobel committee was originally going to give it to both scientists, but then Ross engaged in a discrediting campaign against Grassi. He won (scientists can be just as petty and mean-spirited as the rest of us). And though Newton himself, at least initially, did not have a problem sharing the credit for calculus with Leibniz; his friends did, and started a campaign to discredit Leibniz. On the other hand, Darwin and Russell shared in the announcement about evolution, and neither man made a claim of theft from the other.

Sometimes there is a discovery that everyone knows is out there ripe for the plucking, but no one has found it yet. By 1953 many scientists were trying to discover the structure of DNA. Lots of pieces of the puzzle had been published. They all knew what components went into DNA, just not how it was put together. James Watson and Francis Crick came up with a model that worked, that ticked all the boxes. They along with Maurice Wilkins eventually shared the Nobel prize for the discovery. But that discovery might just as easily have been made by Rosalind Franklin, Erwin Chargaff, Linus Pauling, or others. Or it is even possible that two different groups might have come up with the same answer at the same time. It just happened that Watson and Crick were the ones with the eureka moment. Not that scholarship and hard work aren't involved, but luck also plays a part. 

Coincidental discoveries may seem odd. They might seem like they should be the basis for a conspiracy theory. But when you look at the way science is done; it is not odd at all.

 

(My science fiction novel Star Liner, is now available in paperback or as an e-book through Amazon and other online sources).

link to Star Liner

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Iron Fist in a Velvet Glove

  Despite both of us having science backgrounds, my wife and I share a leaning toward the artistic, though we may express it in different ways. In her life, my wife has been a painter, a poet, a singer, an actor, and a fiction writer. Not to mention a mother. I don’t remember what precipitated this event, but my wife, my son, and I were at home in the front room. My wife was responding to something my son said. She said, “remember, you get half your brains from me. If it wasn’t for me, you’d be a complete idiot.” To which my son started howling with laughter and said to me,” I think you have just been insulted.” Sometimes I feel like Rodney Dangerfield. I get no respect. But that is not an uncommon state of affairs for fatherhood. When my son was going to middle school and high school, my wife was always the one to go in with him to get him registered for classes. One time she was unable to go and I had to be the one to get him registered. “Ugh,” he said. “why can’t Mama do i...
1 comment
Read more

A Child of the . . .

  What was it like to grow up as a child in the 90s? How about the 1940’s? Thinking about a child growing up in each different decade, conjures up images in my mind. But that is all they are: images. I was a child in the 1960’s. I can tell you what it felt like to be growing up in the 60’s and 70’s, but what it felt like to me is not what the history books remember. History will tell you the 60’s was about the Viet Nam War, civil rights, and the space race. The 70’s was Disco and Watergate. I remember being aware of all of those things, but to me this era was about finding time to play with my friends, something I probably share with a child of any decade. It was about navigating the social intricacies of school.   It was about the Beatles, Three Dog Night, The Moody Blues, The Animals, Jefferson Airplane. It was Bullwinkle, the Wonderful World of Color, and Ed Sullivan. There are things that a kid pays attention to that the grown-ups don’t. Then there are things the adults ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Telephonicus domesticus

Alexander Graham Bell’s telephone from 1877 bears about as much similarity to the modern smart phone as an abacus bears to a PC or Mac. There are just about as many leaps in technology in both cases. It’s funny how a major jump in technology happens (like the actual invention of the phone). Then there are some refinements over a few years or decades until it gets to a useful stable form. Then it stays virtually the same for many years with only minor innovations. The telephone was virtually unchanged from sometime before I was born until I was about forty. Push-buttons were replacing the rotary dial, but that was about it. (Isn’t it interesting though that when we call someone, we still call it “dialing?” I have never seen a dial on a cell phone.) Cell phones were introduced and (once they became cheap enough) they changed the way we phone each other. New advancements followed soon after, texting and then smart phones. Personal computers were also becoming commonplace and wer...
Post a Comment
Read more