Serendipity Revisited: What 533 Nobel Prizes Reveal About Breakthrough Science

A recent paper published in Scientometrics explores whether scientific breakthroughs—including those often labeled as “serendipitous”—can be explained in causal and statistical terms. The study tests a fundamental hypothesis: whether there is an underlying logical structure to how discoveries emerge, rather than breakthroughs arising purely by chance.

The analysis covers science’s most influential and canonized discoveries, encompassing all 533 Nobel Prize–winning discoveries from the prize’s inception in 1901 through 2022. Given that not all major discoveries receive a Nobel Prize, the study also examines landmark discoveries documented in leading science textbooks, including “top 100” lists of the greatest scientists and their contributions across disciplines and historical periods. The central conclusion is that scientific discovery is far less random than commonly assumed. What are often described as “serendipitous” breakthroughs are, in most cases, enabled by the development and application of new tools and methods, rather than by chance alone. These tools create the conditions in which unexpected findings become possible, repeatable, and increasingly likely.  https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11192-025-05503-y

But if future breakthroughs depend more on tools than on luck, does that mean the future of science is being shaped less by curiosity and more by whoever controls the money, the machines, and the infrastructure, often quietly and without public accountability, deciding what we get to discover and what stays out of sight? And as new tools set the limits of what can be known, will the things we never discover be written off as bad luck or seen for what they are, the result of choices about what gets built, shared, or kept out of reach, with lasting uneven consequences, for who wins, who loses, and whose realities never get noticed?

PS - I find it unfortunate that A. Krauss, the author of the aforementioned study did not cite a closely related study published in Nature Communications, discussed in my previous post, “The Hidden Equations Behind Scientific Progress: The Art of Engineering Serendipity.” That work reinforces the central message that even the most surprising scientific breakthroughs are not acts of pure chance, but emerge from deeper regularities that can be understood, anticipated, and shaped through causal and statistical insight. https://19-pacheco-torgal-19.blogspot.com/2025/02/the-hidden-equations-behind-scientific.html