> what happened to solving real-world problems, with practical solutions, and doing science along the way?

Imho, the most beautiful results originated from letting people just sit in a room and think, rather than putting pressure on them to generate something useful (e.g. publication pressure, shareholder pressure).

To demonstrate the importance of null results:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michelson%E2%80%93Morley_exper...

> i didn't prove it yet. but that doesn't disprove it

A null result actually disproves a theory.

That's not a null result, but a negative result. A null result is a result that tells you nothing new (by definition). At least, according to the parlance in this thread.

Particle accelerator research has resulted in theories and equipment as a byproduct of what they found - either proving or disproving specific theories, or by producing new or unexpected results. The last of which results in new theories to explain those results. Those new theories producing “useful results”.

MRIs and PET scans were the result of theories that only came about as a result of data that came out of particle accelerators. The goal of the accelerators was never specifically “develop new medical imaging devices”, it was simply the “basic research” that makes thing like that possible in the future.

Promote failure? Do you even know what the scientific method is? They found the higgs boson! They proved some of the most difficult particles predicted by the standard model. How is that a failure????