a Victory fanfare greets the audience Night ScienceA podcast hosted by a longtime friend and colleague Itai YanaiHe is a cancer geneticist at New York University. Martin Lerchera theoretical biophysicist at the Heinrich Heine University in Düsseldorf. The two met in the early 2000s while working on the Genome Project at the European Molecular Biology Laboratory, and reunited a decade later in 2016 to write a book. While brainstorming for their second book, they realized that no one was talking about the behind-the-scenes process of where hypotheses come from – the so-called “night science.”
This prompted the creation of the Night Science Podcast in 2021. With guests at the forefront of research in fields such as biochemistry, developmental biology, neuroscience and computational biology, Yanai and Lercher challenge the status quo of science chat to uncover the lesser known and creative side of night science. With each new episode, we hope to bring viewers a fresh perspective on how researchers generate ideas, where inspiration strikes, and how projects evolve – important skills that aren’t often taught.
Martin Lercher (left) and Itai Yanai (right) are co-hosts of the podcast “Night Science,” which uncovers untold stories of the creative scientific process.
Yanai Itai
What inspired you to launch the Night Science podcast?
Yanai: There is a certain bias, prejudice, or cultural norm against discussing this creative aspect of the research process. I think it’s because science is considered very different from art etc. and we shouldn’t acknowledge “night science” inspiration, wild ideas etc. There should be more emphasis on “day science” with testable hypotheses and robust experiments, but that’s only half the process. We are trying to create a cultural change to embrace the whole day and night science process.
How do you choose your podcast guests and how has that impacted your audience?
Yanai: We choose guests with unique perspectives that give our listeners a fresh look at another side of these highly successful people. Many of them have won the highest awards life can offer, yet here they talk about their feelings and failures. For example, we spoke with a molecular biologist. Bonnie BaslerGraduated from Princeton University, Systems Biologist Uri AronThe Weizmann Institute professor talks about asking “why” questions and keeping a beginner’s mind about research. It’s so important for people to hear these different perspectives. I think a lot of scientists these days fall into the trap of thinking that there’s only one part of science in the daytime.
Relcher: It’s not that I think day science is inferior; day science is what ultimately drives science, because you get grants by testing hypotheses. But you still need to make hypotheses, and there’s an imbalance in the whole culture about how science is done. Another aspect is that it’s not secret knowledge that people are guarding. Many guests told us that this was the first time they consciously thought about their creative process, about how science is done and where their ideas come from. It’s interesting to hear how important the conversations are for young scientists who have only a vague idea of how science is done, and how their projects evolve.
What are your key takeaways from Night Science?
Every project needs a crisis that fundamentally changes the project, because it means we have learned something new. For me, science is a big adventure where things change.
– Itai Yanai, New York University
Relcher: There are important metaphors for the creative process. They don’t have much use in everyday science, but they’re invaluable for generating random ideas that might lead to something. When I spoke with Basler, we discussed how anthropomorphic questions like “Why is the bacterial cell doing something so stupid?” or “What is that protein trying to do with DNA?” might not make sense scientifically, but they can spark intuition and be powerful tools.
Yanai: I liked Aron’s concept of “time-limited ignorance.” Science should be the opposite of ignorance, but he brings a pure and fresh perspective. When you enter a new field, not knowing everything can be your superpower. First, write down your ideas, even if they seem ignorant. Then, check everything. You may have some revolutionary ideas, but these ideas would never have occurred to you if you had read about the entire field from the beginning. No one says that in science, but it’s very important.
What is your own creative scientific process?
Relcher: The core of my creative process is the discussion of how and why I speak. Ideas come when I am talking to group members or collaborators. It may not seem like a cool trick because everyone does it, but it’s important to have a very open and positive attitude. Even if it’s a silly idea, you might find the seed of something interesting from it.
Yanai: The way I think about doing research is like a version of the Stone Soup story, except instead of soup I bring a Margherita pizza. It’s nothing special, but it still looks delicious. I bring the pizza to Martin, and he might say, “Oh, have you thought about adding mushrooms?” Then someone else comes along and suggests that it would be a better pizza if I added bell peppers. I try to be open and accept that the project will change. What will my pizza evolve into? Every project needs a crisis where the project fundamentally changes, because that means I learned something new. For me, science is this big adventure where things change.
What other resources does Night Science provide to the community?
Relcher: We are organizing workshops for students, centered around an editorial that Itai and I co-authored. We are trying to give young scientists the ropes of the creative process, something that experienced scientists do all the time, maybe without even realizing it, but nobody teaches them explicitly. Website It’s a place where anyone interested in teaching the creative process can register, connect, and exchange materials. We hope it will become a hub for this community.
This interview has been edited for length and clarity.