The recent lichen genetic revelation that rewrote textbook definitions is similar, kinda magical coincidences in all the things that had to fall into place (or survivorship bias?/good writer telling story).

If you are not familiar with it - https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2016/07/how-a-gu...

> Thanks to his family background, he could speak German, and he had heard that many universities there charged no tuition fees. His missing qualifications were still a problem, but one that the University of Gottingen decided to overlook. “They said that under exceptional circumstances, they could enroll a few people every year without transcripts,” says Spribille. “That was the bottleneck of my life.”

This marks a significant point in America's status as an educational and scientific power in the world.

That story was so much more exciting than it deserved to be. What a great writer.

> I wonder how many unsolved problems there are out there with this problem.

Assuming that there are many, this has been to me a compelling reason why cultural diversity is important to a company/organization, for both social justice reasons and for the bottom line -- in terms of having people who can broaden the scope of your work and problem recognition.

You don't need to go out of your way looking for highly challenging world class unsolved problems: I'm versed not just in CS/IT but also in various fields of physics, thermodynamics, solid and fluid mechanics, automation, electricity, and electronics, and it's readily apparent to me that some solutions or effects are just obvious to me while being completely elusive to my colleagues with a good level but pure CS/IT education.

This is a case similar to biodiversity vs monoculture: complimentary knowledge fosters alternative modelling scenarios and patterns, nourishing the mind, not just drawing parallels but spurring creative thinking and easing radical changes of perspective.

I would be interested to hear some examples of this. Not doubting you but this would be very enriching.

One obvious example from my own life: Due to <issues> I needed to understand medical research in <area>. There is a huge opportunity in medical research for people who actually have a deep understanding of statistics. Or even an elementary understanding. Protip: just because P>0.5 it does not prove "no effect".

I would dare say the majority of unsolved problems are solvable by an individual with a unique perspective and set of skills. Having those people find those problems seems like a case of serendipity more often than not.

Hopefully people that lack the proper perspective won't lead those with the proper perspective to not even try.

Even more so, there is a question I asked a professor a long time ago.

Does learning make us dumber? As we learn things and take them as absolute truth, we limit our ability to explore new ideas and concepts. The search is sometimes the more important thing.

There’s a reason why Max Planck said:

> “A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.”

It is a similar line of reasoning that led me to recognize that anything you can learn might be useful someday, thus learning as an activity is intrinsically valuable.

If you like the “proper perspective puts it all in place” meme, then you should check out James Burke’s “Connections” TV series (there was a sequel series as well), which is all about those perspectives in the history of science and engineering.

A few. For example, the Indus seals have symbols that may be a language, but no one has been able to decipher them.