Research Outcomes Quotes

Realists do not fear the results of their study.

The very nature of science is discoveries, and the best of those discoveries are the ones you don't expect.

The TV scientist who mutters sadly, "The experiment is a failure; we have failed to achieve what we had hoped for," is suffering mainly from a bad script writer. An experiment is never a failure solely because it fails to achieve predicted results. An experiment is a failure only when it also fails adequately to test the hypothesis in question, when the data it produces don't prove anything one way or another.

I thought scientists were going to find out exactly how everything worked, and then make it work better.

In completing one discovery we never fail to get an imperfect knowledge of others.

One of the most rewarding aspects of my research has been the opportunity to study the potential applications of a new catalyst.

There are cases when it takes 50 or 100 years for fundamental science to achieve results.

The concept of what we're looking for is so important. The fact that the effect is tiny is just our misfortune.

Some of the most important discoveries that scientists have made were not what they were seeking at the time.

It is curious how often erroneous theories have had a beneficial effect for particular branches of science.

Our goal has been to more effectively promote the value of publicly-supported research at our universities, both to the Congress and to the general public.

I congratulate you both on a fine piece of work which I am sure will ultimately prove of importance. I am personally very much interested in your results... In the past I have tried a number of experiments... but without any success.

Indeed optimists rather than defeatists have produced the results for which serious genealogical research is best known.

Sociology is the science with the greatest number of methods and the least results.

The self-regulating mechanism of the market place cannot always be depended upon to produce adequate results in scientific research.

The element of chance in basic research is overrated. Chance is a lady who smiles only upon those few who know how to make her smile.

When you're researching something for a movie, you get a very different kind of reaction than when you're researching something for an article for 'The New York Times.'

If you are funding researchers to look primarily for pathology, not surprisingly, that is what they are going to find and report on.

In science, a path that turns out to be a dead end is very useful because you don't devote resources to focusing on that; you go elsewheres.

Frequently, I have been asked if an experiment I have planned is pure or applied research; to me, it is more important to know if the experiment will yield new and probably enduring knowledge about nature.

It was inevitable that in doing this I should arrive at new results, and it is perhaps understandable that in the end I have felt impelled to present these results not only in the dry form of a catalogue, but also in a more connected and personal one.

There is no difference between fundamental research and applied research. Although this is my view, based on personal taste and the areas I have worked in, it is not necessarily true for others.