S. Feynman, ‘Surely You’re Joking, Mr. Feynman,’ Kindle ed, 2018.

V. Ramakrishman, Why We Die; The New Science of Aging and the Quest for Immortality, Kindle ed., 2024.

Both of the above-listed books have this in common that they were written by natural scientists and are aimed at non-specialists. They also have this in common that their authors were awarded a Nobel Prize: Feynman in physics (2008), Venki Ramakrishnan in chemistry (2009). Not having taken more than a cursory look at either discipline since I graduated from high school—not college, but high school—exactly sixty years ago, I cannot say I understood everything I read. Not the quantum physics which, I am told, is something very few people have really mastered. And not the unfathomably intricate chemistry of life. Far from it, in fact.

What I did, or thought I did, understand was what the two highly respected professors have to say about the kind of atmosphere they did their best to create around themselves as well as the way they approached their respective disciplines and made the discoveries they did. “Way,” in fact, may be too strong a term. Neither book contains a systematic exploration of the scientific method and how to use it to make new discoveries; let alone has a separate chapter on those topics. Nevertheless, the more I read the more I felt there is a lot that, reaching across our very different fields, they and I have in common. So here are a few of the things that, joining the books and taking some leaves out of both, seem to me essential for any kind of career involving discovery, however humble.

– Mixing with people coming from different backgrounds, disciplines, directions, and approaches. To be sure, solitude may have its uses at times. However, no man is or should try to be an island unto himself for very long. Much the same applies to societies. As Feynman in particular explains in some detail, it is the mixing, not the formal talks and Q&A, that is the most important part of many of the scientific/academic conferences taking place all over the world today. Much of the time, all the talks do is provide a framework that endows the entire thing with a timetable that holds it in place. Without them, all the participants would get is chatter—kaffeeklatsch, as the Germans call it.

– As you go along in your work, leave some room for the unforeseen and the accidental. One of the scientists mentioned by Ramakrishman is a Russian molecular biologist by the name of Alexey Olovnikov. Going back to the 1970s, he got his most important idea concerning the way DNA duplicated itself while standing on a platform of a station in Moscow and watching a train go by. Likewise the best ideas often occur as a result, not of focused, systematic study—trying to drill holes in a cushion—but of sudden flashes of insight: the kind some people compare to a stroke of lightning and others call the “aha” moment. Yet this moment itself would not be possible without the problem at hand having been given deep, if often nebulous and even confused, reflection.   

– Don’t hesitate to challenge established views, including those of your superiors. Telling truth to power demands tact and is seldom easy. Still, very often for any kind of progress to be made it must be done. Politely, of course, and, whenever possible, with the aid of humor. But also firmly. A superior, or supervisor, or mentor, who always sticks to his guns and does not allow himself to be persuaded is not worth having.

– Prepare to change your mind when new evidence arrives. As has been said, too often it is not old opinions that die; it is those who hold them, still clinging to their antiquated views, who do. This is not a fate you want for yourself and for your work.

– Of all the various ways of learning, none is better than teaching. During my forty-something years of doing so I sometimes felt as if the University, or Israeli society, or God Himself, had created students less because He wanted them to study but in order that my colleagues (those who care about such things) and I might use them as whetting stones to sharpen our ideas on. Feynman in particular provides some good examples of ideas that were first proposed to him by his students. Blessed is the teacher who has students who, rather than just sit there and maybe take notes, will argue with him. Never mind that they seldom form more than a small proportion of the total. Conversely, a student who merely repeats his teacher’s ideas simply repays good with evil.

– When you are stuck, as you are almost certain to be at one point or another in your research, take a break and strike out in a different direction. During the Middle Ages the opportunity to do so was sometimes provided by going on a pilgrimage. Nowadays a visit to some unfamiliar country or culture can often do a lot of good; especially if you take the time not just to ogle a few important “tourist attractions” but to immerse yourself in the culture in question. Operating on a more modest scale a walk or a game, provided it takes your mind off the problem at hand, can do a lot of good.

– Have fun while you are doing it. If you don’t, then you are almost certain not going to get results. So go and seek the company of graves, worms, and epitaphs.

– None of the above is to suggest that the books in question are perfect. As the title indicates, ‘Surely You Are Joking’ in particular bristles with jokes, practical and not so practical, the author has played on his fellow scientists at one point or another. Not only were some of the jokes childish, but at times I could not help but feel that he was trying to boost himself at the expense of others. Hardly a very attractive thing for anyone, let alone a famous professor, to do.

Good luck.