A triumphant fanfare welcomes listeners to Night Science, a podcast hosted by longtime friends and colleagues Itai Yanai, a cancer geneticist at New York University, and Martin Lercher, a theoretical biophysicist at Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf. The duo met in the early 2000s at the European Molecular Biology Laboratory while working on a genomic project and reunited a decade later to write a book in 2016. While brainstorming for their second book, they realized that nobody talks about the behind-the-scenes process of where hypotheses come from, or what they call “night science”.
This inspired them to create the Night Science podcast in 2021. Although their guests are leading researchers from disciplines such as biochemistry, developmental biology, neuroscience, and computational biology, Yanai and Lercher break away from the status quo of science chats and tap into the untold creative side of night science. With each new episode, they hope to bring a refreshing perspective on how researchers generate ideas, where bursts of inspiration occur, and how projects evolve—a crucial skill that often goes untaught—to their audience
What motivated you to launch the Night Science podcast?
Yanai: There's some kind of stigma, bias, or cultural norms against discussing this creative side of the research process. I think it's because science is supposed to be very different relative to say, the arts, and you're not supposed to acknowledge things like inspiration and wild ideas of “night science.” You're supposed to focus more on “day science” which involves testable hypotheses and robust experiments, but that's just half of the process. We're trying to make a cultural shift to embrace the entire process of day and night science.
How do you select your podcast guests, and what impact has it had on your audience?
Yanai: We choose guests whose unique perspectives will give our listeners a fresh look at the other side of these highly successful individuals. Many of them have achieved the highest awards one can achieve in life, and then here they are talking about their feelings and their failures. For instance, we’ve spoken to molecular biologist Bonnie Bassler, from Princeton University, and systems biologist Uri Alon, from the Weizmann Institute of Science, about asking “why” questions and keeping a beginner’s mind to research. It’s so important for people to hear these different perspectives. I think a lot of scientists these days have fallen into the trap of thinking that there's only just the day science part.
Lercher: It’s not that we think day science is inferior. It’s what ultimately drives science since you get grants for testing hypotheses. However, you still need to generate those hypotheses and there’s an imbalance in the whole culture of how science is done. Another aspect is that it's not this secret knowledge people are guarding. Many of our guests have shared that this was the first time they deliberately thought about their creative process—how they do their science and where they get their ideas. It’s interesting to young scientists, who may only have a vague idea of how science is done, to hear about how important conversations are and how projects evolve.
What are some key takeaways from Night Science?
Every project needs to have a crisis where the project will fundamentally change, because that means you've learned something new. To me, science is just this big adventure where things will change.
– Itai Yanai, New York University
Lercher: There are metaphors that are important for the creative process. They aren't very useful for day science, but for generating random ideas that might lead somewhere, they are invaluable. When we spoke to Bassler, we discussed how anthropomorphic questions like “Why is the bacterial cell doing something so stupid?” or “What is that protein trying to do on the DNA?” might not make scientific sense, but they tap into your intuition and can be a powerful tool.
Yanai: I liked Alon’s concept of timed ignorance. While science should be the antithesis of ignorance, he embraces an innocent, fresh perspective. When going into a new field, not knowing everything can be a superpower. First, you write down your ideas, even if they seem ignorant. Then, you check them all because some might be innovative, but you wouldn’t have had these ideas if you read up on the entire field from the beginning. You don't hear people talk about that in science, but it's so crucial.
What are some of your own creative scientific processes?
Lercher: The core of my creative process is talking, such as how to talk and why. I generate ideas when I talk with people in my group and with collaborators. It might not seem like an interesting trick, because it’s what everybody does, but it’s important to have a very open and positive attitude. Even if it’s a stupid thought, there might be a seed of something interesting in there to pull out.
Yanai: The way I think about doing research is like a version of the Stone Soup story—except, instead of soup, I come in with a Margherita pizza. It’s nothing special, but it still looks appetizing. I’ll bring the pizza to Martin, and he might say, “Oh, did you think about adding mushrooms?” Then someone else comes along and suggests adding green peppers to make a much better pizza. I try to be open and allow for the project to change. What will my pizza evolve into? Every project needs to have a crisis where the project will fundamentally change because that means you've learned something new. To me, science is just this big adventure where things will change.
What other resources does Night Science provide for the community?
Lercher: We host student workshops, mainly based on editorials that Itai and I wrote together. We try to provide young scientists with a bag of tricks of the creative process—something experienced scientists do all the time, maybe without even thinking about it, but which nobody explicitly teaches. We've also created a website for those interested in teaching the creative process, where they can register, connect, and exchange materials. We hope it becomes a hub for this community.
This interview has been edited for length and clarity.
