William James Beal, a professor of botany and forestry at a small college in the US, began an experiment in 1879. He filled 20 bottles with a mix of sand and seeds — each bottle containing 50 seeds from each of 21 species of plant. Then he buried the bottles in a row, their necks pointing down so that water could not get in. His idea was that the bottles should be dug up at fixed intervals, and the seeds planted to see how many of them would sprout.
Beal died in 1924. But his experiment is still going on: It has now been running for more than 120 years. The next bottle is due to be disinterred in 2020 — and if all goes according to plan, the experiment will finish in 2100.
This makes it important, for a couple of reasons. First, it addresses (albeit on a small scale) a question that we don’t know the answer to: How long can seeds of different plants remain viable? The answer matters because we are busy building facilities to store seeds for long periods. For instance, the massive Svalbard Global Seed Vault, built inside a mountain on the Norwegian island of Spitsbergen, opened its doors last year. Yet there may be little point to such a project if seeds, in general, last only a few years.
Second, Beal’s experiment is an example of something rare. Most experiments run for months, or perhaps a year or two. Experiments that run for decades, let alone centuries, are few and far between. And it’s easy to see why. Scientific interests and questions change: Most experiments from 50 or 100 years ago now seem absurdly outdated.
Indeed, in biology the advances in technology have been so fast that we can now answer questions that a decade ago it would not have made sense to ask, because we did not have the tools to approach them. And even if that were not so, most science is paid for on a short-term basis — three to five years, rather than 10 or 20. This makes long-running experiments difficult to plan or to create.
The beauty of Beal’s experiment is that it doesn’t cost anything to speak of, and the technology is simple. But it faces an unusual problem: It depends on the enthusiasm of scientists not even born yet for its completion.
Which illustrates a more general point. There are certain sorts of data — long-term data being just one example — that are extremely hard to collect. It’s no coincidence that we know much more about the bacterium Escherichia coli (which can go through more than six generations a day) and fruit flies (which, kept at room temperature, go through one generation every 10 days) than we do about giant tortoises (which can’t start reproducing until they are 20 years old or so, and often live for more than a century) or Great Basin bristlecone pines — a species of tree where individuals can live to be more than 4,000 years old.
In other words, if you imagine scientific knowledge as having a frontier with ignorance, then parts of that frontier are advancing rapidly — ignorance is yielding (though usually this is a process of revealing more questions to ask, more that we don’t know). But other parts of the frontier are essentially static. Sometimes, the stasis will be due to mundane obstacles such as lack of money or insufficient tools. Sometimes, though, it will be due to more subtle problems — such as the fact that certain kinds of experiments, while simple and elegant in principle, are extremely hard to do.
An important class of “experiments possible but not done” consists of experiments where we are so sure we know what will happen that we don’t bother to check that we are right. And yet, when we do, the answers are often surprising.
Here are two examples. The first comes from another set of 19th-century experiments with seeds, this time carried out by Charles Darwin. In the 1830s and 1840s, it was widely believed that seeds could not survive in salt water.
But no one had done the experiments. Darwin did. (He was moved to do so because he was trying to imagine ways that animals and plants could reach remote islands and begin evolving there.) He found that, contrary to what everyone had assumed, the seeds of many plants could sprout after long periods of immersion in brine.
The second example is more recent and more practical. For decades, doctors “knew” that ulcers were caused by stress. So they were incredulous when, in the early 1980s, two Australian doctors — Robin Warren and Barry Marshall — announced that ulcers were actually caused by the activities of the bacterium Helicobacter pylori. But they were right — and the discovery won them a Nobel prize in 2005.
Of all the limits on expanding our knowledge, unexamined, misplaced assumptions are the most insidious. Often, we don’t even know that we have them: They are essentially invisible. Discovering them and investigating them takes curiosity, imagination and the willingness to risk looking ridiculous. And that, perhaps, is one of the hardest tasks in science.
Olivia Judson is an evolutionary biologist and the author of Dr Tatiana’s Sex Advice to All Creation.
Saudi Arabian largesse is flooding Egypt’s cultural scene, but the reception is mixed. Some welcome new “cooperation” between two regional powerhouses, while others fear a hostile takeover by Riyadh. In Cairo, historically the cultural capital of the Arab world, Egyptian Minister of Culture Nevine al-Kilany recently hosted Saudi Arabian General Entertainment Authority chairman Turki al-Sheikh. The deep-pocketed al-Sheikh has emerged as a Medici-like patron for Egypt’s cultural elite, courted by Cairo’s top talent to produce a slew of forthcoming films. A new three-way agreement between al-Sheikh, Kilany and United Media Services — a multi-media conglomerate linked to state intelligence that owns much of
The US and other countries should take concrete steps to confront the threats from Beijing to avoid war, US Representative Mario Diaz-Balart said in an interview with Voice of America on March 13. The US should use “every diplomatic economic tool at our disposal to treat China as what it is... to avoid war,” Diaz-Balart said. Giving an example of what the US could do, he said that it has to be more aggressive in its military sales to Taiwan. Actions by cross-party US lawmakers in the past few years such as meeting with Taiwanese officials in Washington and Taipei, and
The Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan has no official diplomatic allies in the EU. With the exception of the Vatican, it has no official allies in Europe at all. This does not prevent the ROC — Taiwan — from having close relations with EU member states and other European countries. The exact nature of the relationship does bear revisiting, if only to clarify what is a very complicated and sensitive idea, the details of which leave considerable room for misunderstanding, misrepresentation and disagreement. Only this week, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) received members of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations
Denmark’s “one China” policy more and more resembles Beijing’s “one China” principle. At least, this is how things appear. In recent interactions with the Danish state, such as applying for residency permits, a Taiwanese’s nationality would be listed as “China.” That designation occurs for a Taiwanese student coming to Denmark or a Danish citizen arriving in Denmark with, for example, their Taiwanese partner. Details of this were published on Sunday in an article in the Danish daily Berlingske written by Alexander Sjoberg and Tobias Reinwald. The pretext for this new practice is that Denmark does not recognize Taiwan as a state under