0:00:10 > 0:00:13On New Year's Eve, 1691,
0:00:13 > 0:00:16just a few weeks short of his 65th birthday,
0:00:16 > 0:00:18the Honourable Robert Boyle died at his home
0:00:18 > 0:00:20here on Pall Mall in London.
0:00:23 > 0:00:27Now, Boyle is widely regarded as the founding father of modern
0:00:27 > 0:00:31chemistry, he's certainly one of Britain's most famous scientists.
0:00:31 > 0:00:34He rubbed shoulders with Samuel Pepys, with Isaac Newton
0:00:34 > 0:00:35and with Christopher Wren,
0:00:35 > 0:00:40and every science student knows him for the law that bears his name,
0:00:40 > 0:00:42which relates the pressure and the volume of a gas
0:00:42 > 0:00:44that fits temperature.
0:00:51 > 0:00:54But there was also another romantic,
0:00:54 > 0:00:58visionary side to the man which was revealed on a piece of paper
0:00:58 > 0:01:02that was found in his personal effects just after his death.
0:01:12 > 0:01:15This artefact is so significant that it's kept here at
0:01:15 > 0:01:20the Royal Society, a stone's throw from where Boyle lived and died.
0:01:28 > 0:01:32And here it is, it's a list written in Boyle's neat handwriting
0:01:32 > 0:01:35at the time the Royal Society was founded.
0:01:35 > 0:01:39And although it has no title, it looks like, if not a to-do list
0:01:39 > 0:01:41then at least a...a list of things
0:01:41 > 0:01:46that Boyle thought could be achieved by science.
0:01:46 > 0:01:52Number one is the prolongation of life. The art of flying.
0:01:52 > 0:01:55The transmutation of metals.
0:01:55 > 0:02:01A practical and certain way of finding longitude.
0:02:01 > 0:02:06A ship to sail in all winds, and a perpetual light.
0:02:07 > 0:02:11Boyle's list is eclectic and, in places, surreal.
0:02:12 > 0:02:17It seems he's interested in attaining gigantic dimensions.
0:02:17 > 0:02:21He wants to stop and even turn back the ageing process.
0:02:21 > 0:02:26He'd like to find a way of continuing long underwater
0:02:26 > 0:02:27and emulating fish,
0:02:27 > 0:02:32and feels that varnishes, perfumable by rubbing, would be worth having.
0:02:34 > 0:02:38Now, this list would've seemed fantastical
0:02:38 > 0:02:39to someone in the 17th century.
0:02:39 > 0:02:44It would've seemed like science fiction, but what I find remarkable
0:02:44 > 0:02:49about it is that all but two of the 24 things on this list have now been
0:02:49 > 0:02:54achieved by science, and I suppose that makes Boyle a visionary.
0:02:59 > 0:03:03Robert Boyle recognised that science, indeed British science,
0:03:03 > 0:03:08could do much more than just expand our knowledge of the world.
0:03:08 > 0:03:12He thought that science could also be used to change our world,
0:03:12 > 0:03:16to enrich our lives and create a better future for everyone.
0:03:24 > 0:03:28Since Boyle wrote his list, the world has been changed by science
0:03:28 > 0:03:32and scientists, and it's here in Britain
0:03:32 > 0:03:34where some of the greatest changes have their roots.
0:03:38 > 0:03:41This is where James Watts and George Stephenson
0:03:41 > 0:03:43harnessed steam power,
0:03:43 > 0:03:45where Rutherford and Chadwick unravelled
0:03:45 > 0:03:47the architecture of the atom.
0:03:49 > 0:03:51Where Edward Jenner worked out
0:03:51 > 0:03:54the principles of vaccination, saving millions of lives
0:03:54 > 0:03:55in the process.
0:03:57 > 0:04:00Robert Watson-Watt's radar has transformed travel,
0:04:00 > 0:04:04and Tim Berners-Lee's worldwide web has transformed everything.
0:04:08 > 0:04:11There is no doubt that science, much of it British,
0:04:11 > 0:04:15has created the modern world, but how that progress should be
0:04:15 > 0:04:19achieved has always been contentious.
0:04:19 > 0:04:22In this film I want to explore the drivers of that scientific
0:04:22 > 0:04:26progress, from the curiosity-led exploration of nature, to
0:04:26 > 0:04:31the solutions of practical problems and to financial gain.
0:04:31 > 0:04:35I also want to explore our scientific future
0:04:35 > 0:04:38and how we can ensure that that future is always going to be
0:04:38 > 0:04:40a better place to live than the past.
0:04:57 > 0:05:01Throughout history, Britain's scientists have often been
0:05:01 > 0:05:03motivated by one thing.
0:05:03 > 0:05:07Indeed some argue it's perhaps the greatest driver of scientific
0:05:07 > 0:05:13discovery - the simple aspiration to understand how nature works.
0:05:15 > 0:05:21In its purest form it is just that, the desire to understand
0:05:21 > 0:05:25without any regard at all for how useful the discoveries may be,
0:05:25 > 0:05:26or how profitable.
0:05:26 > 0:05:30This approach to science is called curiosity-driven research,
0:05:30 > 0:05:33sometimes blue-skies research.
0:05:33 > 0:05:35And the best example of
0:05:35 > 0:05:41a practitioner of this pure form of discovery is probably John Tyndall,
0:05:41 > 0:05:45who had a passion, it should be said, for the great outdoors.
0:06:00 > 0:06:05John Tyndall was born in 1820 into a working-class family,
0:06:05 > 0:06:09but he ended up at the heart of the scientific establishment.
0:06:09 > 0:06:14He was appointed a fellow of the Royal Society aged 32 and became
0:06:14 > 0:06:18professor of natural philosophy at the Royal Institution a year later.
0:06:22 > 0:06:25But as well as being a scholar, Tyndall was also
0:06:25 > 0:06:27something of a romantic.
0:06:27 > 0:06:31One of his favourite places to find inspiration was the Alps.
0:06:31 > 0:06:36Indeed, the spectacular alpine landscape prompted
0:06:36 > 0:06:39one of his greatest discoveries, which in turn inspired
0:06:39 > 0:06:44generations of scientists to pursue fundamental research.
0:06:44 > 0:06:47Tyndall wrote about the beauty of the mountains in this
0:06:47 > 0:06:52wonderful little book, Hours Of Exercise In The Alps.
0:06:52 > 0:06:56He writes, "They seemed pyramids of solid fire.
0:06:56 > 0:06:57"As the evening advanced,
0:06:57 > 0:07:00"the eastern heavens low down assumed a deep
0:07:00 > 0:07:02"purple hue above which,
0:07:02 > 0:07:06"and blending with it by infinitesimal gradations,
0:07:06 > 0:07:11"was a belt of red, and over this again zones of orange and violet."
0:07:15 > 0:07:18But Tyndall was also a scientist,
0:07:18 > 0:07:22so he understood that whilst there's an aesthetic beauty to nature,
0:07:22 > 0:07:25there's a deeper beauty. A beauty that lies below the surface,
0:07:25 > 0:07:31a beauty in understanding how and why things happen.
0:07:31 > 0:07:37So Tyndall set out to understand the origin of those magnificent colours.
0:07:42 > 0:07:46To do that, Tyndall designed an experiment that he hoped
0:07:46 > 0:07:47would provide the answers.
0:07:50 > 0:07:53Obviously a tank full of water,
0:07:53 > 0:07:58and into that water I'm just going to put a few drops of milk.
0:08:00 > 0:08:04Now that basically just introduces some particles into the liquid.
0:08:08 > 0:08:16Now what Tyndall then did was shine a white light into the tank,
0:08:16 > 0:08:17and you immediately see
0:08:17 > 0:08:20that the tank lights up with different colours.
0:08:20 > 0:08:22Tyndall loved this.
0:08:22 > 0:08:27In his typically poetic fashion, he described it as "sky in a box".
0:08:27 > 0:08:33You see that at this side of the tank, then the solution is blue
0:08:33 > 0:08:35and as you move through the tank,
0:08:35 > 0:08:37then it becomes more and more yellow
0:08:37 > 0:08:41and, actually to us, this end, it's even beginning to become orange.
0:08:41 > 0:08:45So this is the alpine sky in a box,
0:08:45 > 0:08:49and Tyndall had an explanation for why this happens.
0:08:53 > 0:08:57So there's the tank and here's a source of white light, which
0:08:57 > 0:09:01as Tyndall well knew, is made up of all the colours of the rainbow.
0:09:01 > 0:09:05Now what Tyndall proposed is that the blue light has a higher
0:09:05 > 0:09:10probability of bouncing around a scattering of the particles
0:09:10 > 0:09:11of milk in the water.
0:09:13 > 0:09:14We now know that this is
0:09:14 > 0:09:17because blue light has a shorter wavelength than the other
0:09:17 > 0:09:21colours of visible light, making it more likely to scatter.
0:09:22 > 0:09:27So that means that the blue light will be the first to scatter
0:09:27 > 0:09:29and get dispersed throughout the liquid,
0:09:29 > 0:09:33and so the first piece of the tank will look blue.
0:09:35 > 0:09:38This is essentially what happens in the sky.
0:09:41 > 0:09:44Instead of droplets of milk, Tyndall believed that
0:09:44 > 0:09:47blue light from the sun was more likely
0:09:47 > 0:09:49to scatter off particles of dust
0:09:49 > 0:09:51and water floating in the atmosphere,
0:09:51 > 0:09:53and so colour the sky blue.
0:09:59 > 0:10:03But the tank also explains the sunset colours.
0:10:03 > 0:10:07As the light penetrates deeper into the milky water, eventually
0:10:07 > 0:10:11all of the shorter wavelengths of blue light are scattered away,
0:10:11 > 0:10:15leaving just the longer wavelengths of orange and red, so the water
0:10:15 > 0:10:20looks progressively more orange and, if the tank were long enough, red.
0:10:21 > 0:10:23So, too, the sky.
0:10:23 > 0:10:28As the sun gets lower, its light has to travel through more atmosphere,
0:10:28 > 0:10:31so the shorter blue wavelengths scatter away completely, leaving
0:10:31 > 0:10:37just the orange and red light, making the sky appear red at sunset.
0:10:42 > 0:10:48Now Tyndall's explanation was right in principle but wrong in detail.
0:10:48 > 0:10:50See, Tyndall thought that the light was
0:10:50 > 0:10:56scattering off particles of dust in the air. In fact, it isn't.
0:10:56 > 0:10:58It's scattering off the air molecules themselves,
0:10:58 > 0:11:00but Tyndall couldn't have known that
0:11:00 > 0:11:03because the existence of molecules wasn't known at the time.
0:11:07 > 0:11:10But it didn't matter and, in fact, it was the misinterpretation
0:11:10 > 0:11:13of his results that led Tyndall to make his most important
0:11:13 > 0:11:18discovery of all, and it had nothing to do with the colour of the sky.
0:11:24 > 0:11:28Being a curious scientist, Tyndall decided to proceed
0:11:28 > 0:11:33and carry out more experiments, so he took a box of air
0:11:33 > 0:11:35filled with dust...
0:11:38 > 0:11:42..and he let the dust settle for days and days and days.
0:11:42 > 0:11:46He called his sample with all the dust settled out
0:11:46 > 0:11:48"optically pure air".
0:11:48 > 0:11:51And then he started putting things in the box to see what happened.
0:11:51 > 0:11:55So he put some meat in it and he put some fish in it, and he even put
0:11:55 > 0:12:00samples of his own urine in it, and what he noticed was something very
0:12:00 > 0:12:05interesting - the meat didn't decay, the fish didn't decay, and his
0:12:05 > 0:12:11urine didn't cloud. He said that it remained as clear as "fresh sherry".
0:12:12 > 0:12:16Now by allowing the dust to settle out, Tyndall had also
0:12:16 > 0:12:20inadvertently allowed bacteria to settle out.
0:12:22 > 0:12:26He hadn't just created dust-free, or optically pure air.
0:12:26 > 0:12:30Without realising it, Tyndall had sterilised it.
0:12:30 > 0:12:32He'd let all of the bacteria settle out
0:12:32 > 0:12:37and stick to the bottom of the box. The air inside was now germ-free.
0:12:41 > 0:12:44It may not have been his original intention, but Tyndall had
0:12:44 > 0:12:48provided decisive evidence for a controversial theory of the time,
0:12:48 > 0:12:55and that is that decay and disease are caused by microbes in the air.
0:12:59 > 0:13:04John Tyndall was a man who followed his curiosity for its own sake,
0:13:04 > 0:13:06not for where it might lead.
0:13:07 > 0:13:11He didn't set out to discover the origins of airborne disease when he
0:13:11 > 0:13:17began exploring the colours of the sky, but that's exactly what he did.
0:13:17 > 0:13:20It's appropriate then that curiosity-led
0:13:20 > 0:13:24investigation like this is often called blue-skies research.
0:13:42 > 0:13:45Scientists have continued to follow in Tyndall's footsteps,
0:13:45 > 0:13:49expanding our horizons way beyond his blue skies,
0:13:49 > 0:13:53to explore the great questions above our heads beyond the skies.
0:14:00 > 0:14:03In the 150 years since Tyndall, scientists have built
0:14:03 > 0:14:07increasingly sophisticated telescopes in a quest
0:14:07 > 0:14:10to answer the most fundamental questions about our universe.
0:14:12 > 0:14:15Indeed, today it's even possible to place sophisticated
0:14:15 > 0:14:20technology beyond our atmosphere to peer into the depths of space.
0:14:28 > 0:14:32One such satellite is gazing at the star that first inspired
0:14:32 > 0:14:34Tyndall to investigate the colour of the sky.
0:14:43 > 0:14:46Our sun is just one of over 200 billion stars that
0:14:46 > 0:14:48make up our galaxy.
0:14:49 > 0:14:53It's 1.4 million miles in diameter and burns at a temperature
0:14:53 > 0:14:58of 5,500 degrees Celsius at its surface.
0:15:00 > 0:15:03But despite being our nearest neighbouring star, much is
0:15:03 > 0:15:05still unknown about the sun.
0:15:07 > 0:15:10Helen Mason is working to change that.
0:15:10 > 0:15:12How could you not be fascinated by the sun
0:15:12 > 0:15:14when you see images like this?
0:15:14 > 0:15:16Look at these, they look like computer graphics
0:15:16 > 0:15:19from a film. This is from...
0:15:19 > 0:15:20Sci-fi film. This is real.
0:15:24 > 0:15:27This is from the Solar Dynamics Observatory,
0:15:27 > 0:15:30and what you can see here is a huge eruption on the sun.
0:15:30 > 0:15:33If you imagine the size of the earth
0:15:33 > 0:15:35is almost the size of the tip of my finger. Yeah.
0:15:35 > 0:15:39What are the big, outstanding questions about our star?
0:15:39 > 0:15:43Well, there's been an outstanding question which we're tackling.
0:15:43 > 0:15:47When you have an eclipse you see the atmosphere of the sun, the corona,
0:15:47 > 0:15:51and although the surface of the sun is about 6,000 degrees, the corona
0:15:51 > 0:15:56is a million degrees, and that's intuitively something quite bizarre.
0:15:56 > 0:15:58Cos the heat's coming from the core, so it's...
0:15:58 > 0:16:00The heat's coming up from the core, but you don't naturally
0:16:00 > 0:16:05expect something cool, about 6,000 and then a million degrees.
0:16:05 > 0:16:09So one of the real questions is why. What heats that corona?
0:16:09 > 0:16:13It's a very difficult problem. We're making some progress
0:16:13 > 0:16:15although we haven't absolutely cracked it yet.
0:16:19 > 0:16:23Helen's pursuit of knowledge may be noble, but there are those
0:16:23 > 0:16:27who question the validity of fundamental research like hers.
0:16:29 > 0:16:31From rockets to particle accelerators,
0:16:31 > 0:16:35blue-skies research costs billions of pounds,
0:16:35 > 0:16:38and to some this is an utter waste of taxpayers' money.
0:16:43 > 0:16:48If I was to ask the question, "Well, what use is this knowledge?"
0:16:48 > 0:16:49How would you answer that?
0:16:49 > 0:16:51All knowledge is useful,
0:16:51 > 0:16:54so scientific endeavour in itself is useful.
0:16:54 > 0:16:57Understanding why something behaves in the way it is.
0:16:57 > 0:17:00I think there's an inspirational element there
0:17:00 > 0:17:03when people want to know about where they are, who they are,
0:17:03 > 0:17:06what's happening up in the heavens, what's happening with the sun.
0:17:06 > 0:17:10Civilised society is about why, you know, why does it work like that?
0:17:10 > 0:17:13What happens? And I think if you take that away then you just say,
0:17:13 > 0:17:17"Well, how do I make this particular device?
0:17:17 > 0:17:19"How do I build a better car? How do I do that?"
0:17:19 > 0:17:21Those are different questions. I just don't think
0:17:21 > 0:17:25they should squeeze out the curiosity-driven science altogether.
0:17:27 > 0:17:30Blue-skies research is important because knowledge has its
0:17:30 > 0:17:35own worth, but its value also comes from the benefits it brings.
0:17:35 > 0:17:37It's responsible for all manner of progress,
0:17:37 > 0:17:40from cancer treatments to nuclear power,
0:17:40 > 0:17:42so when it comes to allocating funds,
0:17:42 > 0:17:44do you try to anticipate the benefits
0:17:44 > 0:17:48the work MIGHT bring, or simply finance research for its own sake?
0:17:50 > 0:17:53Now, this dilemma is something that John Tyndall was
0:17:53 > 0:17:57well aware of as far back as 1873.
0:17:57 > 0:18:01He said that, "Scientific discovery may not only put dollars
0:18:01 > 0:18:04"in the pockets of individuals, but millions into the exchequers
0:18:04 > 0:18:10"of nations, the history of science amply proves, but the hope of doing
0:18:10 > 0:18:15"so never was, and never can be, the motive power of investigations."
0:18:15 > 0:18:18In other words the acquisition of money,
0:18:18 > 0:18:23the generation of profit, or even solving a particular goal,
0:18:23 > 0:18:26cannot be the only reason for funding a particular piece
0:18:26 > 0:18:31of research, because the acquisition of knowledge is priceless.
0:18:32 > 0:18:35You might think that persuading society to support
0:18:35 > 0:18:38the pursuit of knowledge through blue-skies research
0:18:38 > 0:18:42is a modern phenomenon, but you'd be wrong.
0:18:42 > 0:18:45It's a fight that has existed at the heart of science
0:18:45 > 0:18:46from the very beginning.
0:18:55 > 0:18:59Founded in 1660, to recognise, promote
0:18:59 > 0:19:03and support excellence in science, the Royal Society
0:19:03 > 0:19:07is a fellowship of the world's most eminent scientists, all of whom
0:19:07 > 0:19:11have in some way contributed towards our understanding of the world.
0:19:13 > 0:19:16So at first glance it can appear that this place was founded
0:19:16 > 0:19:19solely for the blue-skies dreamers.
0:19:27 > 0:19:31But a book written just a few years after the society was founded
0:19:31 > 0:19:34shows that things aren't always what they seem.
0:19:40 > 0:19:44The title is, The History of the Royal Society of London
0:19:44 > 0:19:47For the Improving of Natural Knowledge.
0:19:47 > 0:19:50This is an idealistic view of science,
0:19:50 > 0:19:53the curiosity-led exploration of nature.
0:19:53 > 0:19:56But things, of course, are always more complicated.
0:19:56 > 0:19:58And you can see that even here, in this picture,
0:19:58 > 0:20:01at the side of the title page.
0:20:01 > 0:20:03There are four figures in the picture.
0:20:03 > 0:20:05Central is King Charles II,
0:20:05 > 0:20:09who'd given the society its royal charter five years before.
0:20:09 > 0:20:13And there's this figure here, this angelic figure.
0:20:13 > 0:20:17It's thought that this is a Greek representation of fame.
0:20:17 > 0:20:21You see it's placing a wreath on Kind Charles' head.
0:20:21 > 0:20:25So this is saying, "To Charles, if you give us money,
0:20:25 > 0:20:29"if you fund us, then you will become famous."
0:20:29 > 0:20:30Why?
0:20:30 > 0:20:34Well, you can see that by looking into the background of the picture.
0:20:34 > 0:20:38The figures are surrounded by the instruments of science,
0:20:38 > 0:20:40the achievements of science.
0:20:40 > 0:20:45So there's a telescope here and clocks, and there's a gun here.
0:20:45 > 0:20:49There are things that would enrich the country industrially
0:20:49 > 0:20:53and economically, as well as enriching knowledge.
0:20:53 > 0:20:57So this picture is saying, "If you invest in science, then, yes,
0:20:57 > 0:21:01"you will become famous, you will advance knowledge,
0:21:01 > 0:21:05"but also, you will advance the economic interests of the country."
0:21:11 > 0:21:15The natural philosophers of the Royal Society had realised
0:21:15 > 0:21:19that to pursue knowledge, to understand the world,
0:21:19 > 0:21:20you need money.
0:21:26 > 0:21:29And so the Royal Society went into overdrive.
0:21:29 > 0:21:32It kept its promise to deliver wealth
0:21:32 > 0:21:34and innovation to the country.
0:21:35 > 0:21:40This was no place for airy-fairy ideas, like emulating fish.
0:21:40 > 0:21:44Instead, they put science to work on immediate practical problems,
0:21:44 > 0:21:47both abroad and on home soil.
0:21:47 > 0:21:51They worked on everything from clocks to guns, even brewing.
0:21:51 > 0:21:55All things that would contribute to the economy, create wealth
0:21:55 > 0:21:59and, of course, for the king, fame.
0:21:59 > 0:22:02But it also had an unexpected consequence.
0:22:02 > 0:22:06By actively going out and asking for money,
0:22:06 > 0:22:10the Royal Society had introduced a new concept into science.
0:22:10 > 0:22:14Because science was now no longer just about curiosity.
0:22:14 > 0:22:18It was about targeted research for economic gain.
0:22:18 > 0:22:22And that's a tension that has been acutely felt ever since.
0:22:30 > 0:22:33Some people believe that targeted science,
0:22:33 > 0:22:35as done by the Royal Society,
0:22:35 > 0:22:40has less intellectual merit than the pure pursuit of knowledge.
0:22:40 > 0:22:44One such thinker was the blue-skies man himself, John Tyndall.
0:22:46 > 0:22:49In the 1870s, to an audience in America,
0:22:49 > 0:22:52he said that behind all our practical applications,
0:22:52 > 0:22:55there exists a region of intellectual action
0:22:55 > 0:22:59to which practical men have rarely contributed,
0:22:59 > 0:23:03but from which they draw all their supplies.
0:23:03 > 0:23:04In other words, he knew
0:23:04 > 0:23:08there is a distinction between blue-skies research
0:23:08 > 0:23:10and applied research,
0:23:10 > 0:23:14and he also knew which one had more intellectual merit.
0:23:18 > 0:23:23As Tyndall saw it, his blue-skies science was far superior.
0:23:23 > 0:23:25But this simple experiment demonstrates
0:23:25 > 0:23:28the value of targeted science.
0:23:29 > 0:23:31This is what's called a bimetallic strip.
0:23:31 > 0:23:34Actually, it's two of them in parallel.
0:23:34 > 0:23:38They're called bimetallic strips because one side is brass
0:23:38 > 0:23:40and the other side is steel.
0:23:40 > 0:23:44So you've got steel, brass, brass, steel.
0:23:44 > 0:23:47As you can see, they're set up parallel to each other.
0:23:47 > 0:23:49Simple enough.
0:23:49 > 0:23:52But the value of this device only becomes clear
0:23:52 > 0:23:54when the temperature changes.
0:23:55 > 0:23:57If I drop this into some boiling water...
0:23:59 > 0:24:01..then immediately...
0:24:04 > 0:24:07..those strips separate.
0:24:08 > 0:24:13The reason for that is that brass expands more than steel
0:24:13 > 0:24:16when you heat it to a given temperature.
0:24:16 > 0:24:22Now, if you were a pure blue-skies scientist, as Tyndall meant,
0:24:22 > 0:24:24then what you'd do is you'd say,
0:24:24 > 0:24:26"Well, that's interesting. I wonder why that is?"
0:24:26 > 0:24:28And you'd start investigating
0:24:28 > 0:24:30things like the atomic structure of the metals
0:24:30 > 0:24:33to work out why they behave in that way.
0:24:33 > 0:24:34And that would be all you cared about.
0:24:34 > 0:24:38Whereas, if you were one of those lesser-applied people,
0:24:38 > 0:24:39as Tyndall would have it,
0:24:39 > 0:24:44then you might ask questions such as, "How useful could this be?"
0:24:44 > 0:24:47That's technology, that's engineering.
0:24:47 > 0:24:51Well, the answer turns out to be this is very useful indeed.
0:25:03 > 0:25:07So useful, in fact, that the inventor who came up with
0:25:07 > 0:25:10the bimetallic strip believed it could change the world.
0:25:17 > 0:25:20He was a man called John Harrison.
0:25:20 > 0:25:24A man on a quest to solve a highly-specific problem.
0:25:35 > 0:25:37One that caused a terrible accident
0:25:37 > 0:25:40in the waters surrounding a small archipelago
0:25:40 > 0:25:44just off the south-western tip of the Cornish peninsular.
0:25:50 > 0:25:53These are the Isles of Scilly.
0:25:53 > 0:25:56On a calm day, they're a haven for tourists
0:25:56 > 0:26:00and locals who seek out the peace and tranquillity of the waters here.
0:26:08 > 0:26:11But it's a different story when the weather is stormy.
0:26:16 > 0:26:20The Scillies are a complex mixture of jagged rocks in the water
0:26:20 > 0:26:22and perilous rock-fringed islands.
0:26:23 > 0:26:26If you get lost here, it's a graveyard.
0:26:34 > 0:26:40On 22nd October, 1707, there was a tremendous storm,
0:26:40 > 0:26:44just at the time when Admiral Sir Cloudesley Shovell
0:26:44 > 0:26:47was sailing his fleet back from a glorious naval defeat
0:26:47 > 0:26:49in the south of France.
0:26:49 > 0:26:52He wanted to turn east into the English Channel
0:26:52 > 0:26:54to take the fleet home to Portsmouth.
0:26:54 > 0:26:57But he was out of position.
0:26:57 > 0:27:00And what he did was he turned east into the Scilly Isles.
0:27:00 > 0:27:06His flagship, HMS Association, hit the rocks here at Gillstone.
0:27:06 > 0:27:10This is an engraving of what it might have looked like.
0:27:10 > 0:27:14There were 800 men on HMS Association.
0:27:14 > 0:27:15All of them lost their lives.
0:27:15 > 0:27:18You can imagine what it would have been like.
0:27:18 > 0:27:22They would have been smashed against rocks like this.
0:27:22 > 0:27:25Sir Cloudesley went down with his men.
0:27:25 > 0:27:28And three other of the ships also were wrecked.
0:27:28 > 0:27:31They were swept north by the waves.
0:27:39 > 0:27:43All in all, somewhere between 1,500 and 2,000 lives
0:27:43 > 0:27:44were lost on that night.
0:27:44 > 0:27:49It was the second worst peacetime disaster in British naval history.
0:27:50 > 0:27:55And all because the fleet had no idea where they were.
0:28:03 > 0:28:07Shovell and his men had no precise method, storm or not,
0:28:07 > 0:28:09to calculate the fleet's longitude,
0:28:09 > 0:28:12their position east or west around the Earth.
0:28:15 > 0:28:17They didn't stand a chance.
0:28:17 > 0:28:19But they were by no means the first.
0:28:19 > 0:28:23For centuries, ocean navigators had struggled to find their longitude
0:28:23 > 0:28:27and repeatedly, voyages ended in tragedy.
0:28:33 > 0:28:38So in 1714, shocked by the loss of Shovell's men,
0:28:38 > 0:28:43Parliament demanded a method to find longitude be produced.
0:28:43 > 0:28:48£20,000 would be paid for the most accurate solution.
0:28:48 > 0:28:52The Board of Longitude was set up to adjudicate.
0:28:52 > 0:28:55They were inundated with responses from mathematicians
0:28:55 > 0:28:58and natural philosophers.
0:28:58 > 0:29:01But amongst the ideas was a surprising proposal.
0:29:02 > 0:29:07And it came from Yorkshire-born carpenter John Harrison.
0:29:11 > 0:29:13What the board were anticipating
0:29:13 > 0:29:16was some kind of fundamental geometrical method
0:29:16 > 0:29:17for measuring longitude,
0:29:17 > 0:29:20perhaps by looking at the positions of the stars
0:29:20 > 0:29:21or the phases of the moon.
0:29:21 > 0:29:25But Harrison had a more practical idea in mind.
0:29:25 > 0:29:30He knew that if you knew the time in Greenwich from your ship,
0:29:30 > 0:29:32wherever it was in the world,
0:29:32 > 0:29:34you could calculate the longitude
0:29:34 > 0:29:37just by measuring the position of the sun in the sky.
0:29:37 > 0:29:40The problem was that in the 1700s
0:29:40 > 0:29:43nobody had built a clock accurately enough
0:29:43 > 0:29:46to keep time on a long sea voyage.
0:29:46 > 0:29:51So Harrison decided to build such a clock and thereby claim the prize.
0:29:56 > 0:29:59Producing a clock that remains accurate
0:29:59 > 0:30:02on a rolling ship is not straightforward.
0:30:03 > 0:30:07Changing temperatures at sea play havoc with the mechanism,
0:30:07 > 0:30:11causing the metal components of the clock to expand or contract,
0:30:11 > 0:30:14varying the speed at which the wheels turn
0:30:14 > 0:30:17and making the clock either lose or gain time.
0:30:23 > 0:30:27So Harrison invented his bimetallic strip to compensate.
0:30:27 > 0:30:30As the strip curves to varying degrees,
0:30:30 > 0:30:32depending on the temperature,
0:30:32 > 0:30:35it adjusts the time keepers accordingly
0:30:35 > 0:30:38and ensures that the clock's accuracy is maintained,
0:30:38 > 0:30:40whatever the temperature.
0:30:46 > 0:30:49Bristling with other Harrison inventions, like ball bearings
0:30:49 > 0:30:54which produced friction, the clocks worked brilliantly.
0:30:57 > 0:31:0125 years after he began, Harrison eventually presented the board
0:31:01 > 0:31:05with what was essentially a large pocket watch.
0:31:05 > 0:31:0913 centimetres in diameter, he called it the H4.
0:31:14 > 0:31:18Now, the principle of finding longitude is very simple.
0:31:18 > 0:31:22All you need to know is the difference in time
0:31:22 > 0:31:26between noon where you are and noon in Greenwich.
0:31:26 > 0:31:31What I have to do is watch the sun as it tracks across the sky
0:31:31 > 0:31:35and look for the time when it reaches its highest point,
0:31:35 > 0:31:38zenith, that's noon here.
0:31:40 > 0:31:42And then I read off that time
0:31:42 > 0:31:46on a clock that's been set to Greenwich Mean Time,
0:31:46 > 0:31:51and that time here in the Isles of Scilly
0:31:51 > 0:31:53is...about...
0:31:59 > 0:32:01..now.
0:32:01 > 0:32:06Which is 12:39 and 20 seconds.
0:32:06 > 0:32:11I can feed that number, 39 minutes and 20 seconds,
0:32:11 > 0:32:15into a few equations, they're called the equation of time values,
0:32:15 > 0:32:18they take account of things like the Earth's orbit,
0:32:18 > 0:32:21and out will come my longitude.
0:32:21 > 0:32:24So my longitude here in the Scilly Isles
0:32:24 > 0:32:27is 6.29 degrees west of Greenwich.
0:32:32 > 0:32:35For its maiden voyage to Jamaica,
0:32:35 > 0:32:37Harrison's clock was at sea for two months.
0:32:37 > 0:32:40Thanks partly to its bimetallic strip,
0:32:40 > 0:32:44it lost just 5.1 seconds.
0:32:44 > 0:32:46It was a triumph for Harrison.
0:32:52 > 0:32:55However, Harrison was quick to learn the real price
0:32:55 > 0:32:57of financial assistance from the Board of Longitude.
0:33:00 > 0:33:02The Board were made up of astronomers
0:33:02 > 0:33:05and they were very much in Tyndall's camp.
0:33:05 > 0:33:08They expected that the longitude problem would be solved
0:33:08 > 0:33:12by some kind of advance in our fundamental understanding
0:33:12 > 0:33:15of the universe, a pure solution.
0:33:15 > 0:33:17So every time Harrison came along
0:33:17 > 0:33:21with his rather more applied idea, they rejected it.
0:33:21 > 0:33:25And it wasn't until Harrison presented his fifth timepiece
0:33:25 > 0:33:27that the board almost reluctantly
0:33:27 > 0:33:29accepted that the problem had been solved,
0:33:29 > 0:33:33and even then, they didn't pay him the full prize money.
0:33:35 > 0:33:38But the longitude problem had been solved
0:33:38 > 0:33:42by the British government funding applied science.
0:33:42 > 0:33:45And, in fact, so accurate is Harrison's solution
0:33:45 > 0:33:47that this method was still used
0:33:47 > 0:33:52for finding the position of ships until the 1970s.
0:33:56 > 0:33:59What Harrison and the longitude story shows
0:33:59 > 0:34:03is that it isn't only Tyndall's blue-skies science
0:34:03 > 0:34:05that can lead to profoundly important results.
0:34:05 > 0:34:07If you have a specific problem
0:34:07 > 0:34:11and you focus time and effort and money on it,
0:34:11 > 0:34:15then applied science can be equally successful.
0:34:18 > 0:34:20Harrison's clock marked the beginning
0:34:20 > 0:34:22of a string of important problems
0:34:22 > 0:34:25that would be solved by science.
0:34:32 > 0:34:35Already, agriculturists like Jethro Tull
0:34:35 > 0:34:38had transformed the efficiency of Britain's food production.
0:34:40 > 0:34:42Now it was the turn of other practical men
0:34:42 > 0:34:44to improve things still further.
0:34:49 > 0:34:53Electricity, once just an interesting sideshow,
0:34:53 > 0:34:55was moved centre stage.
0:34:55 > 0:34:58Joseph Swan produced the electric light bulb,
0:34:58 > 0:35:02transforming life by extending the useful day.
0:35:04 > 0:35:08In 1837, Wheatstone and Cooke's electric telegraph
0:35:08 > 0:35:12shrank the world almost overnight.
0:35:12 > 0:35:16And 40 years later, Alexander Graham Bell's telephone
0:35:16 > 0:35:18shrank it still further.
0:35:21 > 0:35:23Britons designed steam turbines,
0:35:23 > 0:35:26commercialised steel production
0:35:26 > 0:35:29produced vacuum cleaners
0:35:29 > 0:35:32and made artificial hips.
0:35:35 > 0:35:38This was science at its crowd-pleasing best.
0:35:38 > 0:35:42Progress made, lives transformed, wealth generated.
0:35:42 > 0:35:47It's what the Royal Society promised to do all those years ago.
0:35:47 > 0:35:53Fulfilment of the dreams expressed in Boyle's rather bizarre list.
0:35:53 > 0:35:56I mean, we've even been able to emulate fish
0:35:56 > 0:36:00through the invention of the aqualung and submarines.
0:36:00 > 0:36:03But let's not forget item one on Boyle's list,
0:36:03 > 0:36:05the prolongation of life.
0:36:05 > 0:36:07This is the area of targeted science
0:36:07 > 0:36:10that we surely care about most of all -
0:36:10 > 0:36:12the extension of our lives
0:36:12 > 0:36:15through the development of new drugs and new treatments.
0:36:15 > 0:36:21THIS is an area in which Britain has always excelled.
0:36:36 > 0:36:38Companies like Glaxo, Beecham and Wellcome
0:36:38 > 0:36:41were at the forefront of drug discovery and manufacture
0:36:41 > 0:36:44in Britain for most of the 20th century.
0:36:45 > 0:36:47The British pharmaceutical industry
0:36:47 > 0:36:50has produced drugs from penicillin to Zantac.
0:36:52 > 0:36:55They have pioneered antibiotic medicine,
0:36:55 > 0:36:57enabled mass vaccination
0:36:57 > 0:37:00and made many previously-fatal conditions treatable.
0:37:07 > 0:37:10Today, those companies in Britain exist
0:37:10 > 0:37:13as the fourth-largest pharmaceutical company in the world -
0:37:13 > 0:37:15GlaxoSmithKline.
0:37:15 > 0:37:19A part of an industry worth an estimated £200 billion a year.
0:37:21 > 0:37:24And it's not a business that hangs around waiting for happy accidents.
0:37:25 > 0:37:29What I'm amazed about is the level of sort of work here
0:37:29 > 0:37:34compared to a university. There's so many people actually doing things.
0:37:34 > 0:37:37GSK is behind many of the pharmaceuticals
0:37:37 > 0:37:39that are commonplace in today's market,
0:37:39 > 0:37:42from painkillers to asthma inhalers.
0:37:45 > 0:37:48One of their biggest research and development hubs is here,
0:37:48 > 0:37:52on home soil, 20 miles north of London in Stevenage.
0:37:53 > 0:37:58I love that. Philadelphia, Shanghai, Stevenage(!)
0:37:58 > 0:38:02So this lab, in general, this is the early discovery within biopharm...
0:38:02 > 0:38:06Dr Tom Webb joined GSK three years ago
0:38:06 > 0:38:09and has been working to develop new drugs ever since.
0:38:14 > 0:38:15How do you do it?
0:38:15 > 0:38:18I mean, if somebody comes along from management to GSK and said,
0:38:18 > 0:38:22"Right, we need a drug to treat arthritis. A new one."
0:38:22 > 0:38:25Um...what do you do? Do you say, "OK. Um..."
0:38:25 > 0:38:28Run around screaming(!) Yes! Here's a test tube(!)
0:38:28 > 0:38:33So...it's an incredibly complex process.
0:38:33 > 0:38:35Drug discovery takes ten to 15 years.
0:38:35 > 0:38:39It starts off with a target in mind for treating that disease
0:38:39 > 0:38:41and then we start off with huge libraries.
0:38:41 > 0:38:43Those might be libraries of small molecules,
0:38:43 > 0:38:47so containing tens of thousands of different chemical compounds,
0:38:47 > 0:38:50and it's starting with all of these potential medicines
0:38:50 > 0:38:54and really whittling them down to one candidate, one medicine.
0:38:54 > 0:38:59So that sounds very, very... A targeted approach. Absolutely.
0:38:59 > 0:39:02You have a specific example, a specific challenge in mind.
0:39:02 > 0:39:05It's a beautiful example, isn't it, of a...a...
0:39:05 > 0:39:07Almost like an industrial-scale search. Absolutely.
0:39:07 > 0:39:10For useful antibodies or useful drugs. Sure.
0:39:10 > 0:39:12And we're getting better and better at doing it
0:39:12 > 0:39:15as we gain more experience.
0:39:16 > 0:39:20The screenings done at pharmaceutical companies such as GSK
0:39:20 > 0:39:23allow researchers to test millions of different compounds,
0:39:23 > 0:39:26antibodies or genes to see if they'll work
0:39:26 > 0:39:29as part of a new drug or treatment.
0:39:29 > 0:39:33The scale of the work means the chance of success
0:39:33 > 0:39:36over conventional research methods is dramatically increased.
0:39:38 > 0:39:41One of GSK's medicines is a treatment for lupus.
0:39:41 > 0:39:46Lupus is a disease which hasn't seen any new treatments for 50 years.
0:39:46 > 0:39:49And as a result of this really sort of strategic way of working,
0:39:49 > 0:39:51having a target in mind
0:39:51 > 0:39:54and developing a medicine for that target using a library,
0:39:54 > 0:39:58has enabled us to market this medicine in lupus.
0:39:59 > 0:40:02Sufferers of lupus are often plagued with tiredness,
0:40:02 > 0:40:06skin rashes, joint pain and swelling
0:40:06 > 0:40:10as their immune system attacks the body's own healthy cells.
0:40:10 > 0:40:13Symptoms this new drug has helped to relieve.
0:40:14 > 0:40:18And other treatments are emerging as a product of this strategic
0:40:18 > 0:40:20and focused method of developing medicines.
0:40:22 > 0:40:24In your view, are the great advances of the future
0:40:24 > 0:40:27going to come from that targeted approach
0:40:27 > 0:40:30because you can apply a great amount of brain power on it,
0:40:30 > 0:40:33or is somewhere, Pasteur sat in his shed with a Petri dish...
0:40:33 > 0:40:36Yeah, yeah! ..who's going to say, "No, it's here!"
0:40:36 > 0:40:39It's a great question. If we were just playing around in the lab,
0:40:39 > 0:40:42I think the likelihood of us stumbling across a discovery
0:40:42 > 0:40:45that enables us to make a medicine is probably unlikely.
0:40:45 > 0:40:48So we have to commit to making medicines for patients,
0:40:48 > 0:40:51and that doesn't happen by complete serendipity.
0:40:57 > 0:40:59The pharmaceutical industry in Britain
0:40:59 > 0:41:02is a triumph for home-grown science,
0:41:02 > 0:41:05providing cures for previously-untreatable diseases
0:41:05 > 0:41:09and changing the lives of millions of patients around the world.
0:41:11 > 0:41:15This is an impressive place and it's science on an industrial scale.
0:41:15 > 0:41:17And you see these vast research labs.
0:41:17 > 0:41:21And that's what you need, because you have to do hundreds of thousands
0:41:21 > 0:41:24or even millions of individual experiments
0:41:24 > 0:41:26to bring a new drug to market.
0:41:26 > 0:41:29It also costs billions of pounds.
0:41:29 > 0:41:32So this is targeted science.
0:41:32 > 0:41:35There are particular problems that need solutions.
0:41:35 > 0:41:37There's a particular disease that needs treating.
0:41:37 > 0:41:39And I suppose for medical science as a whole,
0:41:39 > 0:41:41if you can state its goal in one simple sentence,
0:41:41 > 0:41:44it's to make people better.
0:41:47 > 0:41:50It's undeniable that targeted research delivers,
0:41:50 > 0:41:53but, and it's a big but,
0:41:53 > 0:41:55there is a catch. And it's this.
0:41:56 > 0:41:58In any commercial environment,
0:41:58 > 0:42:01specific targeting brings with it a possibility
0:42:01 > 0:42:05that during the process of discovery, any kind of result
0:42:05 > 0:42:09that doesn't positively enhance the chance of success may be ignored.
0:42:14 > 0:42:17Now, on the face of it, that seems fair enough.
0:42:17 > 0:42:20But in fact, it's extremely worrying indeed.
0:42:20 > 0:42:24See, if you look through the History of Science,
0:42:24 > 0:42:26through any scientific journal,
0:42:26 > 0:42:30then you'll find that the negative results are recorded,
0:42:30 > 0:42:32as well as the positive ones.
0:42:32 > 0:42:36And that's important because all knowledge is valuable.
0:42:37 > 0:42:41But in a commercial setting where you're asking a question,
0:42:41 > 0:42:44"Can we find a drug to cure this particular disease,
0:42:44 > 0:42:46"to do this particular job?"
0:42:46 > 0:42:50Then the temptation is to ignore the negative results.
0:42:50 > 0:42:53This is almost anti-knowledge.
0:42:53 > 0:42:56It goes against the ethos of science.
0:42:56 > 0:42:59And, more importantly, it closes the doors
0:42:59 > 0:43:04to some magnificent, serendipitous discoveries.
0:43:11 > 0:43:14One such discovery came from a young scientist
0:43:14 > 0:43:16who began his career earlier than most.
0:43:17 > 0:43:21A career that heralded a new dawn for modern chemistry.
0:43:23 > 0:43:26At first sight, this is a fairly unremarkable photograph.
0:43:26 > 0:43:29You can see it's of a young boy in Victorian clothes,
0:43:29 > 0:43:32it's framed quite nicely.
0:43:32 > 0:43:36It's only when you start to understand the story behind the photograph
0:43:36 > 0:43:39that it becomes very interesting indeed.
0:43:49 > 0:43:54This is a self-portrait of a 14-year-old boy.
0:43:54 > 0:43:57He took it in 1852,
0:43:57 > 0:44:01which is only just over ten years after the invention of photography.
0:44:01 > 0:44:05So photography was still experimental at this time.
0:44:05 > 0:44:07And he would've had to have an array
0:44:07 > 0:44:12of quite complex chemicals in his house.
0:44:12 > 0:44:15So given the quality of this photograph,
0:44:15 > 0:44:19then that makes him a very precocious individual indeed.
0:44:22 > 0:44:25His name is William Perkin. He was the son of an East End carpenter.
0:44:25 > 0:44:29And his father must've recognised his talent,
0:44:29 > 0:44:32or at least valued education,
0:44:32 > 0:44:34because just one year later, at the age of 15,
0:44:34 > 0:44:39he was sent to the Royal College of Chemistry to learn chemistry.
0:44:39 > 0:44:43To become what we'd now call a scientist.
0:44:46 > 0:44:49We know he had an inquiring mind,
0:44:49 > 0:44:51not because he took the picture,
0:44:51 > 0:44:53but because of what he did just four years later.
0:44:58 > 0:45:03When he started his career, Perkin was living in exciting times.
0:45:03 > 0:45:04This was the age of empire.
0:45:04 > 0:45:06A world where in time,
0:45:06 > 0:45:11the sun really would never set on British Imperial assets.
0:45:11 > 0:45:13But as the empire expanded,
0:45:13 > 0:45:17so, too, did the risk to Britain's colonialists
0:45:17 > 0:45:21as they were exposed to deadly tropical diseases such as malaria.
0:45:21 > 0:45:24Fortunately, there was relief available for malaria
0:45:24 > 0:45:27in the form of a drug called quinine.
0:45:27 > 0:45:31But it could only be extracted from the bark of the cinchona tree,
0:45:31 > 0:45:35which grows on the remote eastern slopes of the Andes,
0:45:35 > 0:45:38making it expensive and difficult to get hold of.
0:45:38 > 0:45:43What was needed was a more reliable and cheaper source.
0:45:53 > 0:45:55So the young William Perkin was set to work
0:45:55 > 0:45:59to find a way to make synthetic quinine in the lab.
0:46:06 > 0:46:08This is a mock-up of what Perkin did.
0:46:08 > 0:46:11Not using the real chemicals because they're dangerous,
0:46:11 > 0:46:14but the idea is simple and the logic is impeccable.
0:46:14 > 0:46:18So this is quinine, the white powder that Perkin wanted to make.
0:46:18 > 0:46:21Now, he knew this was made of carbon,
0:46:21 > 0:46:23nitrogen, oxygen and hydrogen,
0:46:23 > 0:46:26and he also knew the proportions.
0:46:26 > 0:46:29So he reasoned like this.
0:46:29 > 0:46:32Why don't I take something simpler, an amine,
0:46:32 > 0:46:34actually an amine called aniline,
0:46:34 > 0:46:37which is a ring of carbons
0:46:37 > 0:46:40with a nitrogen and a couple of hydrogens stuck on the end.
0:46:40 > 0:46:44So it's everything you need, apart from the oxygen.
0:46:44 > 0:46:48He then took this, potassium dichromate,
0:46:48 > 0:46:50which is a strong oxidising agent.
0:46:50 > 0:46:54Now, today, we know that this rips electrons off things,
0:46:54 > 0:46:58but Perkin thought that it added oxygen.
0:46:58 > 0:47:00And so, you see what he wanted to do?
0:47:00 > 0:47:02He wanted to take a simple compound
0:47:02 > 0:47:05with carbons, nitrogens and hydrogens,
0:47:05 > 0:47:08mix them together with something that stuck oxygens on
0:47:08 > 0:47:11and produce quinine.
0:47:14 > 0:47:18So...he just dissolved this potassium dichromate in solution,
0:47:18 > 0:47:23dissolved some amines in dilute sulphuric acid,
0:47:23 > 0:47:27turned the tap, mixed them together...
0:47:28 > 0:47:31..heated them up, and waited.
0:47:39 > 0:47:42And at the end of the experiment, what he got was a muddy, black mess.
0:47:42 > 0:47:47In other words, apparently, the experiment had failed.
0:47:49 > 0:47:52Had Perkin been working in a modern commercial environment,
0:47:52 > 0:47:54he might well have stopped here.
0:47:54 > 0:47:57But what happened next is a prime example
0:47:57 > 0:48:00of why the inquiring mind must be given the freedom to explore
0:48:00 > 0:48:03and knowledge should never be lost.
0:48:05 > 0:48:07What it's thought is that Perkin just decided to go back,
0:48:07 > 0:48:13cleaning up the apparatus after making this dark sludge,
0:48:13 > 0:48:16but what he noticed is that the residue
0:48:16 > 0:48:21seemed to colour whatever it touched purple.
0:48:21 > 0:48:23So being a good experimental chemist,
0:48:23 > 0:48:25he decided to investigate further.
0:48:25 > 0:48:28So he took that residue,
0:48:28 > 0:48:32and this is actually a real sample of that chemical,
0:48:32 > 0:48:34and he started trying to purify it
0:48:34 > 0:48:38to investigate it, to understand its properties.
0:48:38 > 0:48:41So he mixed it with petroleum
0:48:41 > 0:48:44and then he mixed it with ethanol.
0:48:48 > 0:48:52And if I just dab a bit of cloth into this...
0:48:56 > 0:48:59..then it dyes it bright purple.
0:48:59 > 0:49:04So Perkin had discovered a dye which he called mauveine.
0:49:08 > 0:49:13Perkin's dye was far superior to anything created by nature,
0:49:13 > 0:49:17and one that could be mass produced at a fraction of the cost.
0:49:17 > 0:49:19It quickly gained popularity
0:49:19 > 0:49:21after Queen Victoria appeared at her daughter's wedding
0:49:21 > 0:49:25in a silk gown dyed with mauveine.
0:49:25 > 0:49:28Thanks to Perkin, the 1890s
0:49:28 > 0:49:31are now affectionately known as the Mauve Decade.
0:49:36 > 0:49:37But it didn't stop there.
0:49:37 > 0:49:41Synthetic dyes have been brightening our lives ever since.
0:49:41 > 0:49:45Perkin helped usher in the dawn of organic chemistry.
0:49:45 > 0:49:49A new age of products, from plastics to perfumes and medicines.
0:49:52 > 0:49:54The interesting thing about William Perkin
0:49:54 > 0:49:59is that if he'd set out with the aim of discovering a new purple dye,
0:49:59 > 0:50:01then he probably would've failed.
0:50:01 > 0:50:04And if he hadn't been a curious scientist
0:50:04 > 0:50:09wanting to understand why his experiment didn't seem to work,
0:50:09 > 0:50:12then again, he would've probably failed to discover that dye.
0:50:14 > 0:50:16Perkin's story is a warning
0:50:16 > 0:50:19of the potential perils of targeted research.
0:50:19 > 0:50:22Had he been working in a commercial environment,
0:50:22 > 0:50:25it's likely that because the purple dye wasn't quinine,
0:50:25 > 0:50:27his further investigations
0:50:27 > 0:50:30would've been thought to be an expensive waste of time.
0:50:30 > 0:50:34So though targeted science appears to give us what we want,
0:50:34 > 0:50:36there is the very real chance
0:50:36 > 0:50:41that it can mean we miss out on unexpected discoveries.
0:50:50 > 0:50:54There have always been arguments about the purpose of science.
0:50:54 > 0:50:58Whether its primary role should be the pure pursuit of knowledge,
0:50:58 > 0:51:01or whether its main value is in the application of science
0:51:01 > 0:51:07to solving problems that improve our lot, serving society.
0:51:07 > 0:51:08It's a balancing act
0:51:08 > 0:51:12and one that hasn't always been easy to get right.
0:51:12 > 0:51:16But here, on a piece of land behind St Pancras Station in London,
0:51:16 > 0:51:20a fresh attempt at the perfect mix is under way.
0:51:24 > 0:51:26This is no ordinary building site.
0:51:28 > 0:51:32This is what will become the Francis Crick Institute.
0:51:32 > 0:51:35A groundbreaking new scientific institution.
0:51:39 > 0:51:43At the helm of this new project is the president of the Royal Society,
0:51:43 > 0:51:45Professor Sir Paul Nurse.
0:51:45 > 0:51:48And he's determined that this will be the best of both worlds.
0:51:50 > 0:51:52A place that will give the public what they want from science,
0:51:52 > 0:51:57whilst also giving unprecedented freedom to the inquiring mind.
0:52:01 > 0:52:03Well, the scale of this building is a thing that surprises me.
0:52:03 > 0:52:06It's immense. It really is immense.
0:52:06 > 0:52:07Cavernous, actually. Yeah.
0:52:07 > 0:52:11So up here, we're going to have offices, seminar rooms, laboratories.
0:52:11 > 0:52:14As you go up, we've got about three floors
0:52:14 > 0:52:17of laboratories on this side, four on the other.
0:52:17 > 0:52:21But you can spot everybody because of the atrium in the middle.
0:52:21 > 0:52:26And this will be the cafeteria for up to 1,500 researchers.
0:52:33 > 0:52:35When completed in 2015,
0:52:35 > 0:52:38this will be the largest biomedical research centre in Britain.
0:52:41 > 0:52:45And uniquely, engineers, physicists, chemists and biologists
0:52:45 > 0:52:48will all work together under one roof.
0:52:54 > 0:52:57I want to produce something like a sort of creative anarchy.
0:52:57 > 0:53:00I'm not going to divide all these up into different departments.
0:53:00 > 0:53:02They're all going to be mixing together.
0:53:02 > 0:53:05And I'm hoping that will spark off something new.
0:53:05 > 0:53:08So that the architecture reflects not only the philosophy,
0:53:08 > 0:53:11but the way that you think science should be done?
0:53:11 > 0:53:13It really does that.
0:53:13 > 0:53:16We wanted many different scientists to work together.
0:53:16 > 0:53:19The building's designed to produce exactly that.
0:53:19 > 0:53:22By allowing all disciplines to mix together,
0:53:22 > 0:53:24this building will offer immense creative freedom
0:53:24 > 0:53:26for those blue-skies thinkers.
0:53:26 > 0:53:29But everyone will also share the targeted goal
0:53:29 > 0:53:33of delivering useful science to the British public.
0:53:33 > 0:53:35It's a biomedical research institute
0:53:35 > 0:53:39and it will do discovery science to work out how living organisms,
0:53:39 > 0:53:40living things, work,
0:53:40 > 0:53:43but always with the objective
0:53:43 > 0:53:47of what relevance will that be to medical problems.
0:53:47 > 0:53:52I think this idea of undirected creativity,
0:53:52 > 0:53:55but with a purpose in mind,
0:53:55 > 0:53:57which, as you say, is to understand life, living things,
0:53:57 > 0:53:59that's important, isn't it?
0:53:59 > 0:54:02Look, good science is done by great individuals
0:54:02 > 0:54:07with a creative vision about what they're trying to do.
0:54:07 > 0:54:09If you direct them too much top-down,
0:54:09 > 0:54:10you never get that creativity.
0:54:10 > 0:54:14You know, you can't tell a Picasso what to paint.
0:54:14 > 0:54:18Picasso will have a creative idea and want to do it himself.
0:54:18 > 0:54:19It's the same for a scientist.
0:54:22 > 0:54:23The Francis Crick Institute
0:54:23 > 0:54:27will give space for scientists to make serendipitous discoveries,
0:54:27 > 0:54:32whilst also giving society medical research that will change the world.
0:54:39 > 0:54:42The story of Science Britannica is, in many respects,
0:54:42 > 0:54:45the story of science itself.
0:54:45 > 0:54:49This collection of rocks in the North Atlantic has produced
0:54:49 > 0:54:54far more than its fair share of world-class scientists.
0:54:54 > 0:54:56And has been the scene of more discoveries
0:54:56 > 0:55:00and inventions than any nation could reasonably expect.
0:55:03 > 0:55:07That it happened here is partly serendipitous.
0:55:07 > 0:55:11The fact that the likes of Robert Boyle, Humphry Davy
0:55:11 > 0:55:15and Isaac Newton were born here is down to chance.
0:55:17 > 0:55:20That they were able to thrive here is not.
0:55:23 > 0:55:25The establishment of our ancient universities,
0:55:25 > 0:55:28where all these great scientists were educated,
0:55:28 > 0:55:32together with the formation of the great institutions of science,
0:55:32 > 0:55:35the Royal Society and the Royal Institution,
0:55:35 > 0:55:39have all ensured that Britain is a place where science
0:55:39 > 0:55:43and scientists continue to be celebrated.
0:55:46 > 0:55:48Whaa-hah!
0:55:48 > 0:55:51And that purple vapour there is iodine.
0:55:53 > 0:55:56The relative freedom that scientists enjoy in Britain
0:55:56 > 0:56:01has meant that cutting-edge research has always been done here.
0:56:01 > 0:56:03And while that research is sometimes controversial,
0:56:03 > 0:56:07the benefits it has brought have been immeasurable.
0:56:07 > 0:56:10Now, in the 21st century,
0:56:10 > 0:56:15Britain is still pre-eminent in many areas of science and engineering.
0:56:23 > 0:56:27But it's vitally important we don't take this position for granted.
0:56:27 > 0:56:31It seems to me that means making sure
0:56:31 > 0:56:35we don't constrain the next Boyle, Davy or Newton
0:56:35 > 0:56:39by forcing them to deliver only what it's thought society needs.
0:56:45 > 0:56:49We must also ensure that they are encouraged to be free thinkers
0:56:49 > 0:56:50like John Tyndall,
0:56:50 > 0:56:53who pursued his blue-skies research,
0:56:53 > 0:56:54or William Perkin,
0:56:54 > 0:56:58who saw the practical potential in his discoveries.
0:57:11 > 0:57:15William Perkin is not one of our country's most famous scientists,
0:57:15 > 0:57:18but I believe he should be better known because his career encompasses
0:57:18 > 0:57:21all the necessary facets of modern science.
0:57:24 > 0:57:28I mean, here was a man who was not afraid to pursue targeted research.
0:57:28 > 0:57:31In his case, the hunt for a way to prevent malaria.
0:57:31 > 0:57:33But when that research threw up
0:57:33 > 0:57:35an interesting and unexpected result,
0:57:35 > 0:57:38he was curious enough to follow that through.
0:57:38 > 0:57:40And he discovered a strange purple dye
0:57:40 > 0:57:45which he then turned into a successful business, made money,
0:57:45 > 0:57:48and reinvested that money in future research.
0:57:53 > 0:57:56Today, more than ever, science is expensive.
0:57:56 > 0:57:59And more often than not, the public pay for it.
0:57:59 > 0:58:03So scientists have a responsibility to ensure that their knowledge
0:58:03 > 0:58:05is used for the good of society
0:58:05 > 0:58:08and, where appropriate, for commercial gain.
0:58:08 > 0:58:13BUT science is based on curiosity.
0:58:13 > 0:58:17So society also has a responsibility to science,
0:58:17 > 0:58:19which is to always ensure
0:58:19 > 0:58:21that there's space for the dreamers to dream.
0:58:35 > 0:58:37Subtitles by Red Bee Media Ltd