Suspicions are swirling and Bell Labs is burning
Вставка
- Опубліковано 12 чер 2024
- In the midst of the worst period in his company's history, a lone physicist shines as a beacon of hope thanks to his ingenuity and hard work. But soon, Bell Labs will be making headlines for all the wrong reasons. These are the lies of Jan Hendrik Schön. Part 2 of 3.
Part 1: • The man who almost fak...
Part 3: • How to lose a Ph.D in ...
My twitter : / bobbybroccole
My Patreon: / bobbybroccoli
Massive thank you to Scott Bunch for sitting down and speaking with me.
0:00 Chapter 8 - Double Bubble
4:19 Chapter 9 - Best Listener in Physics
14:35 Chapter 10 - Sputtering out of Control
21:37 Chapter 11 - The F Word
32:58 Chapter 12 - Whistleblowers
Jan Hendrik Schön, the Bell Labs Fraud. Plastic Fantastic. Bertram Batlogg. Schön affair, Schön scandal. Nobel Prize fraud. - Наука та технологія
"I didn't believe it could have been fraud because I didn't believe one person could make all that up. Then I realized, we all made it up."
Damn
That statement hit me so hard as I suddenly realised that guy literally weaponised the Confirmation bias fallacy. That’s just genius!
And it is not isolated to Physics departments.
Kind of like the story of THERANOS
It's essentially a similar strategy to the scam of "borrowing" money from everyone while promising to pay them back several-fold and then paying it back to a few people to make it look legit before eventually running off with bigger gains.
If this kind of thing survives for years in the highest echelon of physics, think about how common it probably is in every other field.
hendrik really went "oh sorry you wouldn't know my conclusive evidence, they go to a different school" and it somehow worked
I'd love to let you talk to my conclusive evidence but they're in a different timezone
I frigging love this comment 😂
y’all are too funny in these comments 😭
And she lives in Canada. True story happened to me. Gf told me week of that she and her family were moving to Vancouver, BC right after HS graduation. We were in Oklahoma !Literally told college friends that my girlfriend lives in Canada.
congrats you just got your first subscrber
are you happy with yourself
This guy was the “5-minute crafts” of academia.
my god. that is such a fantastic description.
This is a brilliant metaphor.
oh my god
💀
Yes.
Hendrik: Fakes years of research
Hendrik: can't be bothered drawing another graph
👍
it’s scary to think how much longer he could’ve gone on if he had done it with more aptitude than just copying graphs or making graphs random bell curves.
maybe this guy should just become a science fiction writer, since it's practically similar to what he was already doing.
Hahahahah "Science Fiction" writer. Ba dum tss 🥁🥁🔔
Considering how much of a superstar he was within the scientific community, I bet he'd actually be really successful. Dude can get quite the reaction from people.
yup
Fantasy
Based on the video, though, he seems to lack the imagination necessary.
Dude just social engineered his way up through a mountain of the Earth's finest brains. That in itself is kind of deserving of a Nobel prize
I know lol
If he actually managed to get one they should have just given him one for his ability to pull this off in front of all the people he did
Turns out prizes and universities are ripe for social engineering because they're corrupt. "Peer review" has been totally broken. It's also not scientific.
@@Roescoe I'd wager it's probably alot less corrupt than most of the institutions you believe in. Imagine giving billionaires a pass and grift on the corrupt scientists whose bs ultimately has to,... you know produce real world results.
@@fighterck6241 To be fair, it seems like profit is a lot of the backbone on scientific scandals. Scientists can sometimes be dissuaded into letting this stuff slip because they see potential profit in doing so.
@@fighterck6241 Haha yeah those billionaires fund eugenics. They are one and the same. The elite class wants you dead.
Hendrick feels like a guy who got so traumatized by k-12 and undergrad that like you said, he couldn't adapt to the mindset of academia. All he could do was identify the parameters for "getting a good grade", understand was results would get him such a "grade", and when he couldn't get the "right answer" through honest means and so when his job was on the line, he cheated. It's like when you have math homework and you know you're not finding the correct answer on one problem because the checks aren't working, so you give up and look up an online calculator that will do the entire problem automatically.
Except when you cheat on a calculator you get the right answer
@@RenegadeContextand in this case, you become a fraudster smh
Which is exactly why our education system is terrible and needs an overhaul. We spend 12 years teaching people that learning doesn't matter, only getting the right answer on the right day matters, and the world will literally end if you fail. And then we go all _surprised Pikachu face_ when people carry that mindset with them into their professional careers.
You meet many people like this in university. The people who get A’s and perfect test scores, but their papers get turned in bound in plastic folders with extensive footnotes, when the professor asked for in-line citations. Their papers are 20 pages when the professor asked for 10; the quantity doesn’t add anything of value, but it forces the teacher to give them a high grade, just for the shear effort involved. They’re the kinds of people who don’t take real risks with their work, but think that education is about avoiding mistakes, not forging a new path for themselves. The professors roll their eyes but have to deal with them.
I was in a more creative department, and it was a lot harder for try hards to do well in that environment, especially to get the support they would need to find places in grad school; but they were certainly still there.
@@nothingissimplewithlloydFam you got a really warped view of STEM kids lmao like you obviously got one person that comes to your mind that your generalizing to a whole group of people. There is a lot of different types of tryhards in stem, but the one you're describing sounds more like some AP highschool student. Also idk what uni you went to but rarely was effort ever looked at for grades in stem. If it was a lot of people would be failing due to lack of effort even though they get a lot of it right because they know what they are doing and know shortcuts
Remember too, that Aluminum Oxide (Alumina) is a notoriously difficult substance to work with. It's like the 2nd hardest natural substance ever, after diamond. It's melting point is 2072°C; compare that to Iron, which is already highly difficult to melt, at 1538°C. Aluminum wouldn't exist like we know it without the Hall-Héroult Process. (You know how adding salt to water drops it's melting point? Adding Florine (in the form of Cryolite) to Alumina drops it's melting point too, to around 980°C, which is pretty easy to achieve.) Yeah dealing with Silicon and Silica for electronics is hard, but dealing with Alumina is insanely hard. Hopefully that helps with illustrating why it's even more crazy that he was claiming to use Alumina so easily for this
Just a reminder that adding salt actually increases waters boiling point(not by very much) it's an old wives tale that adding salt decreases the boiling point.
I think 20 grams of salt in 5 liters would move the boiling point from 100C to 100.04C
However, what it will do is increase how easy it is to heat up, as it lowers the specific heat capacity.
Ah Ha! I see the problem you are having, Jan Hendrik Schön didn't actually use Aluminum Oxide, he used Aluminium Oxide, cuz he's German!
alumina... which sapphire (and by extension sapphire glass) is a type of
@@tl4637 Also, increasing the boiling point raises the temperature of the water at the boiling point (by definition), hence cooking your potatoes/pasta/rice slightly quicker :D
But the same fact also helps his case, as it justifies the lack of reproducibility.
This is what happens when Imposter Syndrome is so prevalent among individuals in a collaborative field. Everyone thinks THEY'RE the problem and that makes them the problem.
Maybe instead of saying that people with impostor syndrome are the problem, we should look at what’s making impostor syndrome so prevent in such communities and that’s the problem. But good point
@@placeholderdoe People with Impostor Syndrome aren't a problem, but they become a problem when they let that stop them from calling out a problem. Same way having anxiety doesn't make me a problem, but I become a problem if I lash out at people because of it. At the end of the day, everyone has some level of control over their behaviour. Even if you have no physical control over certain symptoms, simply telling someone that "hey I have X, I might do Y" is a form of control.
I wouldn't call it imposter syndrome. They didn't doubt themselves or their capabilities, they were unsure if they had all the necessary info to make a judgment. Scientists are cautious, and that's what hendrik took advantage of.
In academia, we are all sus
This doesn't really have anything to do with imposter syndrome. I hate that term. People just hear it and want to apply it and comment on every video about it.
The funny thing is his name, Schön. In German we say "die Ergebnisse schönen" meaning to "fiddle to improve your data".
Please pin this reply at the top 😄
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂🤣🤣🤣
My man was destined for this.
Which I think many undergrads are guilty off because they don't want to redo an experiment they messed up. But even then I was never as lazy, I would not generate graphs so perfect because it would make it suspicious. And it was mostly filling out blanks because doing 20 extra measurements takes time.
I thought schon was beautiful?
As a physics student, I can understand why he didn't get caught earlier. The science community is filled with very non-confrontational people. We are perfectionists when it comes to our work, but is really normalized for researchers to never doubt the "scientific postdoc star" because, how could you?
Great video! Loved this series. So sorry for your mom's layout, that part just broke my heart.
The idea of peer review journals is also flawed to a significant degree. All it ends up being is other professionals looking at something and saying, "this seems possible based on the evidence in the paper."
Publishing this stuff without independent reproduction is a great way for this stuff happens.
Not to talk about the fact that calling your collegue out is considered unprofessional an highly inappropriate. This cultivates a culture of silence where frauds have it too easy.
@@MCXL1140 but then they will claim copyright and stuff.
I have a BS - Physics, and I am currently working on my MS. Physicists and mathematicians are some of the thinnest-skinned people I've ever met. Vain, pompous, self-absorbed butthurt crybabies.
"The science community is filled with very non-confrontational people"
Hah until it isn't. Just challenge using proper science the wrong old "well renowned and loved professor" and you may as well say goodbye to your career if you don't switch to some other line of research. Blacklisting, boycotting, brigading, and character assassination in general has existed since the very beginning of modern science.
that little "my mom" was... honestly a bit tragic. There's something about that background music, and the fact that you didn't even say it, but showed it, that genuinely made me sad.. like some unspoken sad truth. you're phenomenal at creating tension, anticipation and just like atmosphere in general
The way it's so tiny too that we don't even see it until he starts to zoom in, really shows just how many people lost their jobs.
Timestamp?
2:06
@@thesleepydot Thanks a lot.
you know who else lost their job?
Halfway through watching this, my house caught on fire. After a while, and after salvaging what we could from the wreckage, I crashed on a friend’s couch for a while. Tonight-it’s the same night-I finished watching this video.
If that’s not an endorsement of what compelling content this is, I dunno what is 🤷♂️
Are you okay?
i would like to say this comment is both very funny and i'm very sorry for you having your house burn
im so sorry to hear about your house, im glad you made it out! this is the best comment on all of youtube btw
Hope you're doing better these days.
Idk why you would endorse a video that burnt your house down but okay
I'm a physicist at the end of my PhD, and I'm aware of (but wasn't involved with) what I'd personally decribe as a fraud in physics that isn't widely known and it's exactly because it's so difficult to outright say another team lied or cheated. Nothing on this scale, of course. Those who identified it thought the results from the original team were remarkable, and wanted to use the technique with their own work, and emailed for advice but were not so politely told to figure it out for themselves from the paper. This caused some frustration, but it did lead to a "fine, we will" attitutde and when it was finally replicated it became very clear why they didn't want to share their methodology - their results were correct but only if you ended the experiment at the exact perfect moment. Like, a ridiculously arbitrary time. Any time after that point caused the trend to evaporate, and the longer it was ran, the worse the result gets (in this particular work, this should not be the case). The method used was claimed to be substantially better than existing methods but it turns out to be useless, unless you already know the outcome you intended to get.
The people who identified this put out a new paper explaining what the results show, and discussing some of the limitations potential pitfalls to be aware of, all of which were mistakes in the original work. But they couldn't call the other team frauds, or say they did it on purpose. In my mind, they likely did, but you can't prove it and you certainly can't go accusing people of it without a lot more evidence than one bad paper. I suspect others believe it was intentional too, but the record was corrected with a new paper and there wasn't much else you could do. I could very easily imagine myself back then in that semiconductor field being quite unsure of how to properly raise concerns in the correct way.
Its hard to prove intent, when so much could go wrong throughout the process.
Thanks for the comment, super insightful!
I fully believe you and am intensely curious which area of physics you're in and what your specialty is. I'm not a physicist, but my parents are. I've heard a thing or two around the dinner table before.
@@poilaaliop My PhD is in studying plasma flows and their associated waves in the solar atmosphere. And I’d bet growing up with physicists you’d hear all sorts, lol!
During gradschool, I encountered two postdocs who were working on the same material, but in different groups.
Postdoc A immediately rushed to measurement despite his sample not resembling the system theorists were interested in. He published a bunch of anomalous results.
Postdoc B spent time faithfully recreating the system in question and published on some subtle effects that one might actually expect to see.
Postdoc A got 5x more citations than postdoc B and a better job.
I do not believe that fraud occurred in this incident, but it's impossible not to get a little cynical after seeing it. Postdoc B was punished for actually being a good scientist and postdoc A was rewarded for publishing nonsensical clickbait.
Who the hell is holding Science and Nature accountable?? Couldn't you bribe your way through
When I started out as a lab tech, I was with a Postdoc who was clearly using one of our machines wrong (sucking in air instead of cells). I told him that what he is doing is going to lead to false results and was told to not worry about it. These results would later go on to be published in Cell Biology and Nature. They stayed up for 5 years, but later had to be retracted.
Lol, I went to a magnet program at a high school in my area, and let me tell you the amount of people who got crazy results because of shoddy equipment work was mind boggling.
What a shame that your experience and advice was not heard.
@@reuternopalzin2422 Experience? He said when he "started" out as a lab tech. I could see how his advice would be ignored bc he is just a newbie, whether or not he is super smart/creatuve/ingenuitive. But it's those sort of folks/scientists that inject doubt into legitimate science work
When I was undergrad for my Chemical Engineering Degree w/ a concentration of Materials and a minor I'm chemistry, one of the biggest things my senior professors drilled into us in our senior Unit Operations Lab, is that you can't trust any results without the calibration and trust in your equipment. We used to get so mad at the teacher bc we thought he was being so nitpicky about the data we got, but as I got older, I understand what he was trying to teach us. Dude has like 30 years in industry under his belt, not just academia. He taught us how to think like engineers and how to not just willy nilly trust data, equipment, etc. I respect that guy a whole lot more now that I am older
@@Kaanfight I was in a college-level Chemistry class recently, and one of the lab techs didn’t dilute our HCL correctly, so it took our lab group about 50% more sodium hydroxide than it should have to titrate the acid. The teacher was just as confused as we were.
So basically: physicists are just way, way too nice.
Its like im in britan
yes, but it's also self preservation, imagine if you outright say he's a fraud and it turns out it really was just a mistake, that would be detrimental to your career and interpersonal relationships with others in the field.
Yes
@@JinchurikiDemon right? i probably wouldnt be saying stuff even if i suspected something, cuz you dont wanna be _that_ guy..
lol schön also means nice in german
This dude literally did what I in high school science classes when my data was a mess because I was...a literal child.
Lmao
The problem is that the educational system trained you to do that, as it does with everyone. We should not be surprised that some people never manage to buck 12 years of indoctrination that only results matter.
Listening to the part "Best Listener in Physics", and this makes me think of a certain other time when the science was a little bit bamboozled: when there was a horse, that could read the people's expectations so well, when its owner gave it an arithmetic task, the horse would tap exactly as many times as what would be the right answer. People, who obviously knew the correct answer, gave an unconscious reaction to each tap of the horse's hoof; as the number got closer to the right one, the anticipation grew higher, reaching its peak just as the horse tapped the last time needed and it was time to stop - reaction so subtle, it may be imperceptible for other people, but for the horse, it was clear enough - so it understood, "these humans expect me to stop now", and stopped. And people were impressed.
So... can we say, that Jan Hendrik Schön just Clever-Hansed the scientific community?
I thought Clever Hans was following subtle signals from his owner?
@@gwenrees7594 audience, owner, same difference, honestly the horse being able to read peoples reactions is impressive enough
My advisor was a postdoc at Bell Labs around that time. He was arriving as Bob Laughlin was clearing out his desk. Knowing Bob. was a big shot, he asked "Got any tips?" Bob responded "yeah, publish fast." I guess Bob's 2 years were up.
Realizing how messed up the situation was at bell labs makes this whole thing so much more understandable. It just kept getting worse. I feel for all the legitimate researchers who got laid off, just to be replaced and overshadowed by a fraud.
2:00 "my mom" ouch, right in the feels. idk why, but that simple graphic was heartbreaking. Very well done 👏 😥
I was just writing a comment on that! the way he didn't even say it, and the music he used made that really tragic to be honest... :(
edit: typo
@@thesleepydot yeah, just the fact that you know it must of been a problem, otherwise I doubt it would be noted. It made the lay-offs much more personal, realising how it must of effected his family, then considering the fact that every lay-off would have effected another family in the same way. Just an excellent example of good communication
@@trybunt yes!!! you put it into words perfectly
His mom worked for bell labs?
@@dodgyyoutuber9560 well, it was certainly presented that way in the video. My time stamp shows the part I'm talking about, but it's been a couple of months, so I can't remember exactly what company he was specifying, but he mentioned lay-offs, then the graphic showed his mom as one of those lay-offs.
it's actually kind of sweet that a big reason he went so long without suspicion is because scientists are so loyal and dedicated to the sanctity of the scientific process, and to putting the search for the truth above all their own personal desires, that they couldn't even imagine that there's someone in the community who ISN'T like that. like, what he did was so antithetical to the whole purpose of scientific endeavors..
For real he literally worked backwards and doesn’t seem like he even try to experiment to actually see of any possibilities, like that one article said he expected them to do the work for him based on what he put out, they were the ones trying to replicate/actually do what he wrote lol
Its ironic yep.
My own father who worked with pathogens and such, falls into that trap a lot.
People lie. No matter where they are. Sadly.
@@elvingearmasterirma7241we saw, alot of examples of bandwagon fallacy over these last three years in that field..
@@blaqlabspodcast5816 Yea its a shame innit how people so casually fall for political falsehoods over their own safety and others safety.
We are lucky we didnt get saddled with the bubonic plague
Except that it's a lot less benign than that. People ignored their own completely valid concerns, and pretended even in their own minds that they were meaningless, because they were incentivized against confrontation, even when the LITERAL TRUTH was on the line. _That's_ antithetical to the whole purpose of scientific endeavours. It's not their fault - the system incentivizes all this - but that makes it worse. It means we can't trust anything the system puts out, because it's proven incompetent to properly investigate fraud even when multiple people have noticed it.
Honestly, what I appreciate so much about this series is that you don't try and paint anyone who Hendrick fooled as 'stupid'. You do an incredible job outlining just how this happened, why people let this slide. Its such a more interesting focus, not on the act of fooling people, but rather, the greater culture that enabled him.
Well I mean they WERE stupid... kinda🤷♂️
As someone in engineering, im horrified by the deletion of outliers. Its called line of best fit for a reason 😟
"On average, the bolts on this car are in perfect shape!"
"What about that one, it's broken."
"Oh it's an outlier so it doesn't matter that much."
“Whenever people asked him what his secret ingredient was, he’d always give the same answer.”
Me: “Love!”
Him: “Aluminum oxide.”
Me: “Awwww…”
Same thing different name. Aluminium oxide is love aluminium oxide is life.
Look how cute it looks: O=Al-O-Al=O. That's beautiful. Also we have to thank aluminium oxide for corundum. Literally the cutest oxide.
Maybe I'm a bit too stoned.
@@taiyoqunAi is the Japanese word for love
the guy must have lived under such pressure, building this gigantic castle of lies and having to stand on top of it, waiting for it to crumble
yeah. even though its entirely his own fault and he should be ashamed, i can't help but think about how incredibly stressed he must've been lol. like, i think about how anxious i was when i lied to my parents about coping well with my polytechnic work... i can't imagine that but with the stakes raised a hundred times
He may have been a total sociopath and not felt it anywhere near what a regular person would
@@RenegadeContextapologies if I am getting the definition of the word wrong, but I’m pretty sure that relates to a mental illness. Now of course that doesn’t excuse his actions but that in of itself(if true) shouldn’t be said as a further reason to not trust him
There are few things I know that are more stressful than thinking your palace of lies about to fall. It makes you a husk (and I didn’t even lie about anything too huge)
@@placeholderdoe Sociopathy isn't mental illness it's a neurological differnce. if a person is a sociopath they won't feel the stress of dishonesty the same way regular people will. They can be benevolent or malevolent but I wouldn't trust either to be honest as they will always do what's right for them and not anyone else.
I don't think this is mental illness because it was so perfectly planned and executed, most mental illneses involve an amount of dijointedness from reality. he would need to udnerstand exactly what is happening for this to come to fruition. Alos if a person is a liar and manipulator I don't think the root of the behaviour should be an indicatin as to whether you trust them or not, they have lied and manipulated, that is all the reason you need not to trust them
This is such high quality production, backed by so much research. I hope this video gets the amount of attention it so clearly deserves. Cannot wait for part 3!
25:00 As a scientist myself, this makes me angry. The entire point of science is that discoveries like this must be INDEPENDENTLY REPRODUCIBLE. So much for peer review. 🙄
@@stuglife5514 you know , assuming you re right , this isnt positive at all
@@stuglife5514 That's not really comparable though. You aren't describing works that went through academic history's peer review process, and many of those "professionals" aren't academic historians, many museums are run by generalist educators and not subject experts while the History Channel is practically a tabloid. The History Channel also says aliens built the pyramids and the Knights Templar hid their treasure in a pit in Canada, them spouting nonsense is neither surprising nor a mark against the field of history as a whole.
Anyone can likewise publish a pop science work full of dubious claims and myths and get a popular TV show to regurgitate it and that does happen all the time, but that's not a major scandal. Nobody expects better of pop science because it's not going through expert review and likewise for pop history, this case was a scandal because it did pass through expert review.
Nobody is citing Death Traps in real historical journals. Some people are citing tank commander memoirs, but only cautiously with consideration for their status as potentially useful but obviously biased primary sources. They may draw incorrect conclusions from them but such is the nature of a field built on the imperfect records of the past. And because of that nature, historians do expect other historians to sometimes be wrong about things, and so other historians do regularly challenge and debate those conclusions.
@@stuglife5514 What the fuck
@@stuglife5514 Settle down. They're saying pop history (like Death Traps) isn't held to the same standards as academic papers on the subject. Same goes for physical science or any self-respecting field of study.
Peer review is just a circle jerk these days
Never have I been so excited by a story, not because I want to know what happens next, since I could solve that with a cursory google search, but because I want to see what you do with it.
That’s how you know you have a unique voice as a content creator. Keep up the good work!
I was a postdoc at this time in another lab and followed Schon's rise and fall in real time. A lot of scientitsts at Bell Labs were quick to latch onto his coat tails on the way up and then feigned innocence in the aftermath. None of his coworkers were even reprimanded or paid for their lack of scrutiny or outright participation in the fraud. They all landed plum jobs afterwards. Bao for example is a professor at Standford.
When I was at Boeing in the early 90's they hired a guy from Bell Labs. The managers were all super impressed with the guy because of his resume. Something seemed off about him as he was very arrogant and didn't like being questioned. He was working on a signal detection algorithm. He had amazing graphs showing how well it worked. After studying his graphs for a few weeks we finally noticed his algorithm was actually detecting the signal just slightly before it had be introduced. So, yeah, his stuff was fake.
THOUSANDS of similar cases exist for senior engineers and above from Microsoft.
I have probably watched this series 3 times and I just noticed that at 1:30 you have Clinton's signature starting the graph, and honestly that's the extra production value that goes unnoticed in a series that is already this good. Bravo.
The visual style really loans itself to these videos. It helps visualize numbers in an easier to understand format, and i like how the video sometimes scrolls back to relevant information that was mentioned before :) this is so good!
It's basically the Jon Bois style of information display. Look up Jon Bois on youtube.
you’re putting such a fun spin on this narrative, your storytelling is 👌
Thanks for creating this. I'm glad it found its way to my feed. I played Don Monroe in a reenactment for the Japanese TV series, The World's Most Astonishing News. (They shot my scenes in the Bay Area, where I live. We'd improvise dialogue, which would be dubbed in Japanese.) Your doc provides fascinating details that didn't fit into the show's segment on the Schön scandal.
one of the best anecdotes ive read from a youtube comment
Bob Laughlin is a beast! Right out of the gate: “you should be ashamed of showing these graphs.” Literally wasn’t fooled for a second
10:37 he's essentially doing what patent trolls do. he's comes up with experiments he "expected" to work and basically crowdsourced them knowing he'd get credit for any result. i wonder if anyone else did this and actually succeeded/got away with it.
Thats a good question.
Do patent trolls also make up the whole idea or principle too?
He was obviously crowdsourcing but his whole project was never gonna work in the first place cuz he faked it all. From what i understand the plastene crystals would shatter when you tried to get them to that temperature; if they could even conduct the electricity he claimed is also a question.
Just wondering, thats all.
I always though of patent trolls just idea stealers. Ideas that work though.
@@desperado3236 not sure if my other reply got deleted. but patent trolls go for ideas they expect to be a thing at some point in the future (or they take existing ideas that nobody bothered to patent). but i think hendrik really thought somebody would be able to do what he claimed; he intentionally picked stuff that seemed plausible "in theory" or stuff that he expected to "definitely be a thing soon". in the same exact way that everyone else in the science world expected to be able to do what hendrik did, hendrik himself expected the same of the science world lol. he was gambling with the ability of the science world to prove his theories, and lost.
Elon Musk's entire career. Buy, mentally abuse the original inventor like with Tesla, or just lie to make newsworthy "inventions".
@@helmaschine1885 Buys twitter, rinses, and repeats.
Lucent collapsed that hard because an executive accidentally replied all to an investor email chain about issues they were having financially. Not that they weren't already in trouble.
Nicely done
Thanks so much, glad you liked it!
oh my gosh I assumed he was doing experiments but tweaking the results to make it look good, I can't believe he wasn't even doing those experiments at all
Hendrik: check out this cool thing
Physicists: source???
Hendrik: uhhhhhhhh idfk, you guys?
Physicists: he is a god among men
IF I did a Malcom Gladwell analysis to this thing. The reason he got away for that time was Impostor syndrome. Not from him but from every single scientist that actually couldnt replicate his findings. I think it says more about the type of personality people in the field have. It is comforting and at the same time disturbing that scientists did not confront him. Most of the personalities that he dealt with gave him the benefit of the doubt and everyone wanted it to be true. I mean for god sake. IT was like inventing a new lightbulb, a new transistor. And it was a lie to the world. Everyone wanted it to be true
I’ll see your Jan Hendrik Schön and raise you Elizabeth Holmes 😉
I don't think it was that big of a factor. Sure, imposter syndrome is a big factor and quite big on academia, but there's still plenty of people who think themselves smarter than everyone else.
The thing is, science is inherently cooperative and that makes it particularly succeptible to these kind of liars. It's more like a small town where you trust most people from within.
Most people act in good faith because it's hard to get away with lies. But it's also quite a risk to call someone out on bullshit because, even if you're in the right, it could make people see you as too judgemental on any overstepping of your judgement.
So if, say, someone assumed Schön was making data up, they could also jump to suspect his supervisor and/or everyone he cooperated with. Later, when it was shown most of them had very little responsibility you'd have a hard time getting them to cooperate with you. And, let's not forget: it's a small town. So, chances are, you may not find someone else who fills the same niche.
"There's a lot of bobs in science"
I can confirm this is very common other domains of science. I once coauthored a single abstract with 3 other people. They were all named Robert lol.
(somewhat unrelated, but as someone named Hendrik, it's somewhat amusing hearing my name said aloud so often. It's not that common in English speaking countries)
Just change your name to Bob
"At one point he had several paychecks piling up" yeah that happens to me all the time because I am crap at life so I just live as cheaply as possible to cope with my disorganization.
As somebody who has published several peer reviewed papers I will say that I made a graph using the same data set as a previous paper ONCE, on accident. And it was caught by my PI in write up, never went further than that..... so I can understand if it happened once with some sort of correction. But this was just unreal
I'm very sorry this doesn't have a higher view count. It's very well researched, well presented, and I can't wait for the next installment.
Good on you mate!
I'd love to see a biography of this man, I'm really interested in the psychology and life circumstances that lead to such weird chains of events
So basically witch hunt anyone who doesn't fit into "society"
@@uioongbion2074 You do realize that what you said doesn't make sense as a response? Are you a bot?
Same. I feel like he was an extreme people-pleaser who got in way over his head, and had no idea how to get out again. And he made himself essentially unemployable, so I wonder how he has been making a living these past 20 years. Interestingly, as far as I understand, he nevertheless has always claimed that his results are true.
@@gremlinchemist3621 No I'm just not a sheep
Gotta love how he tricked people simply by giving them what they wanted. Basically forcing them to accidently do what he was doing intentionally; starting from the conclusion and working backwards.
Man, I know next to nothing about computer science, but you've done a really great job breaking this down into very understandable explanations to help showcase why this was such a massively huge lie. Also this is real fascinating and engaging to watch! Great work!!
Why did you call it computer science? Isn't this field called experimental physics with theoretical physics?
If the original commenter had watched the video, it would’ve been obvious that this was physics and not computer science. Not to mention that the word “physics” was stated multiple times in a minute and I believe computer science was only mentioned in the first part as a critique of the Nobel Prize including very little computer science innovations. Don’t know how someone could make this mistake unless they didn’t watch the video
@@Cygis No need to be a smartass. He obviously just assumed semiconductor physics falls under computer science. He even noted "I know next to nothing about computer science".
Just as a clarification: This is experimental physics, which would benefit semiconductor manufacturing, which would benefit electrical engineering in semiconductors which could theoretically benefit computer science.
@@bowiethedog6285 But has "great job" truly been done to make this "understandable" if the same viewer gets the most basic fundamentals wrong?
This makes me respect anyone who works in these STEM sectors. I don't understand half of the things they talk about but they're the ones making discoveries for all us humans. This dude still has a lot of skill evading being caught, I think that's more impressive than how many papers he faked tbh.
@cxerizo1017 and "not really making discoveries for all of us", after all.
@@pipfox7834 i mean of course they dont deserve the recognition if they fake it
Essentially this story reminds me A LOT of the 1987 Oliver Stone film "Wall Street", where an unremarkable stock broker suddenly becomes a financial giant almost overnight due to him being fed insider information from a larger financial giant who is cheating the system. The people around him, particularly those who know him, have their doubts over his ability (Hal Holbrook) but the powers that be dont know and dont care because he is making them a lot of money. He gets the corner office while others around him, those who have been there a while, are being let go.
Eventually the whole facade is uncovered and Bud Foxx is led away from his corner office for all to see and those who financially benefitted from his con are the first to point fingers and say "bad".
Nah not the same
Not really
idk seems fake
(sharing is very much appreciated)
I guess all the Bobs left sports and moved into academia
Seriously though, top notch stuff as always! A story with this many moving parts has no right to be this comprehensible, but you pulled it off! I can’t wait for part 3!
Regarding the bubble: I graduated college in 2001 and had a retail job at the Linens N Things in Eatontown, NJ, the summer before I went off to grad school. Eatontown is only a few miles from the Holmdel facility of Bell Labs. I remember distinctly taking a job application from a man who'd written that his prior employer was Lucent/Bell Labs and he had multiple Ph.D.s. Very few things have ever so seismically shaken my trust in the inherent justice of the American economic creed - work hard, be smart, and you'll prosper - quite like that.
Oh this having so little views is criminal. Your work is absolutely fantastic, this series is SUCH an amazing watch
imagine the stress this guy must've been in with everybody asking him questions and him just getting deeper and deeper into the lies, I get nausea just thinking about it
Stuff like this happens in nearly all disciplines, thankfully only very rarely to this extent. The amount of nature/science papers this guy was firing off is literally insane. I am currently in my postdoc and the projects are not going well, I'm still going to publish something but probably less than would be expected. At least I'm not fabricating data though, so that's a plus.
Actually, I do know about the fiber cable crash. My dad was hand making parts for it at corning industries. I was a toddler, so obviously I don't know first hand, but they were shipping fiber stuff straight from R&D to companies because so many of them wanted their hands on the tech. The crazy part is, about 90% of the actual work had to be done by hand, and even crazier, you couldn't know if they would all work together until they were deemed good or bad way far down the line. So there was so much redundancy, it was bound to pop.
They let go of most of the offices, my dad with it.
33:05
(at the conference)
Hsu & Loo: Are you familiar with this process for fabricating circuits?
Schön: Of course, I’m an expert at fabrication.
Hsu & Loo: What?
Schön: What?
The fact I got this recommended gives me hopes your channel will blow up. These are such interesting and well edited videos, they deserve a much larger audience!!
Honestly this just proves that being super nice and agreeable with people means you can get away with anything
At least for a while anyways…
Eventually you become rich enough that it is no longer necessary
As a master's degree student in theoretical physics of complex matter, these videos shows an aspect that is a bit overlooked in academia, the fact that having research that lead to dead ends are as valuable as breakthroughs. I was a bit like hendricks, working backwards, correcting data to fit my desired results etc etc.. up until I realized that I'll be backed into a corner one day...anyway great serie, and a great channel to binge, kudos !
Couldn't agree more, I know a chemist who did a PhD project that turned out to be a dead end. This friend legitimately went into a depressive state because he was convinced his future in academia was ruined. I hope it's not true but the pressure these people are under...could never do it.
I am also a phd student. Worse is when the sole focus is making a lot of papers with "positive results". Couple with the limitation of standard phd time (3 years), this can tip phd student to commit this kind of fraud. Cause it is hard to be enthusiastic when you "wasted" 2 years on negative results.
Don't worry, working backwards is what half the scientific community is doing. It's also why no one really tursts scientists anymore because flipping a coin is about as effective.
I don't know anything about physics, but I still can't stop watching this series of 3 videos. Thanks for explaining these hard physics facts for dummies.
Superb program! One of the best programs I have heard that discusses complex scientific topics in such a clear and coherent way, so that every layman can understand the situation. The editing and narration are outstanding, exceeding the standards of a broadcasted program. KUDOS!!
The real question is was he just the only one that got caught, or are there any actual Nobel prize imposters?
No. Because all your work has to be replicable in other labs, so other scientists can use it. So the moment anyone tries to use your "new useful tool" and it doesn't work in your lab, or anyone else's lab - you're done. Game over.
I'm genuinely mind blown by Hendrick's lack of understanding of the scientific method... it's like did he even understand what he was doing was wrong, or he was just THIS ethicless?
This story turned out to be much more fun that I could have ever expected!!! I love the research, presentation and narrative of this story!
Can't wait for the movie/biopic that will paint him as a bold entrepreneur just a la wolf of wallstreet. He succeeded in every way possible even if he was ridiculed in the field postfact, the field ridiculed themselves.
I once did a peer review on a paper. When reading the paper I found that they had fabricated their results, and it could be proven they fabricated it... I raised this issue with the publisher, who just ignored it... They got to publish the paper... Peer review is not what it seems.............
Man, that sucks. :\ Are you allowed to say what paper it is?
It is odd to get a paper published with at least one reviewer, you, having rejected a manuscript and then the reviewers not getting informed on the editorial decision and reasoning. Was this a reputable journal? There are “fake” journals out there.
@@lapin46 Its a decent journal. Think it has an impact factor of about 3. I sure hope its not one of the fake once, considering that I published in it some years earlier ;-)
@@Perfektum Still odd. I hope it did not get to many citations. It would seriously piss me off if that would happen after such a review. Would you mind publishing a DOI?
@@lapin46 For some reason it deletes the comment when I send the DOI, so here is the reference instead: Org. Lett. 2019, 21, 7, 1979-1983
This was SO well done. I thought I was watching “making a murderer”. I loved it.
This whole story reminds me of a joke my mathematics professor used to make to explain derivation/division with results reaching infinity.
"I know the highest number! It is 5!"
"But what about 6?"
"Alright then, 6, but I was close."
"But what about 7?"
"Alright then, 7, but I was close."
"But what about..."
I mean 120 isn‘t that close to 6
its close to 119 though @@onlykflow
this whole series is one of the best things i have ever seen in my entire time on youtube. beautiful work
i haven't been this excited for a series in a long long time 🙌
This is the science publication equivalent of Stephen Glass to the fricken tee. Love this series, can't wait for the next one!
You have great timing
I remember working at a web dev company in 2001 and coming in one Monday to find half the bulbs in the fluorescent fixtures had been removed. Good times.
This is such a great series, I'm so impressed with how clear and well explained everything is to the point that someone like me, who has never even taken a physics class, can not only follow along completely but can also learn and follow some of the science behind these concepts due to your explanations and diagrams. This is a fascinating story and I'm really glad I found this video series. Thanks so much for reporting on this and taking the time and effort to make it so accessible and clear.
It feels odd to note but there's a certain *strength* to zooming in on a graph to reveal a deeply personal tragedy that the narrator silently acknowledges before moving on. There's just something so... I guess *human* about it? It's taking a massive statistic, and creating an individual connection to it. I dunno, something about that just hits hard.
I'm a complete outsider to science academia (hello from the humanities), but this is riveting stuff and so well narrated!!
glad to see another humanities buddy here! this really is quite interesting
Born too early to explore the stars, born too late to finesse the 2000s era scientific community out of thousands of dollars
Absolutely love your style man. It's very high budget feeling even though I'm sure it doesn't break the bank. Remember me, Random Commenter #1023, when you get to 100k subs. You deserve it.
Super well made, love your storytelling! Was pleasantly surprised to see my E&M professor from last semester, Prof. Orenstein, make an appearance at 25:33 :0
so cool watching the calendar fill out. seeing where we were in relation to various landmarks that had already been placed as more was filled really helped me understand what was happening and kept me invested
Holy shit. Dr. Hsu mas my Materials Science professor in Grad school! I had to do a double take when I saw her face pop up. She gave me a C on (what I thought) was a good presentation on Piezoelectrics 😂
Edit: omg and Mark Lee was another professor of mine! I actually did research with him!
The music is bangin' bro
I just found out that Schön doesn’t have a wikipedia article but the scandal does
this feels like a product of the modern education system. he cheated his way to the top not out of some sense of vanity or greed but because that was what he understood to be the way one goes about succeeding. to him being good at science meant being correct at all costs.
the whole video was great, and also: whoever does the floating 3d void animations, take a bow. great editing all around.
36:22 That’s sounds like a deeper issue right there.
‘Yes that’s looks bad, but we’re all in the process of submitting papers so we won’t be able to address any fraud ourselves.’ That’s what I’m hearing. Is that fair?
As a Biologist I laughed at the '1300 of anything' line. When comparing genetic expressions of a small set of genes (lets say 10) and 6 conditions, you'll spend a whole week in the lab to isolate and dilute whatever tissue your organisms give you and then a full day of eye straining pipetting to load up your 3 or 4 plates, each of witch has 385 wells (in their most common style at least). Life is way to random to rely on consistent genetic behaviour so with wild types we have to get a whole bunch of individual organisms to calculate a realistic average. Meanwhile working with volumes between 1-10 microliters means the smallest mistake shows up later. So you do everything in sets of three to at least have a chance to catch your own mistakes.
I guess I chose the wrong field
I am a biochemist, and I worked for a pharmaceutical company. We had to have triplicate measurements on all our rudimentary tests.
Gotta say you’re my new favorite UA-camr. This series and the Reagan particle accelerator series have got to be some of if not the best video essays on the platform. The visual aids matched with the vapor wave music gives the same aura as a summoning salt video and I am eating it up!!! Love these longer videos so keep them coming!
This is so well put together - I was momentarily confused why the video ended only to realize that those almost 40 minutes went by in a flash. 😅
I am OBSESSED with this calendar-format-video. It's so tidy 🤩
"O what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive." It never ceases to amaze me how purveyors of scams like this all think they won't be exposed.
It's a shame this brilliantly executed presentation and the whole storytelling have so little views and likes!
Not the most popular topic though, nerdy topic but nonetheless... too little. Great job all around!
Every now and then one of these videos show up in my recommended. And every time I find myself rewatching the whole short series. Its just so well presented and thoroughly researched. The ending is presented in the first minute of episode 1, but there is suspense all the way through.
This is awesome. I was recommended part 1, but had to look in your channel for part 2.
You deserve more subscribers! Your presentation is on point and u put in so effort into the production, even having real scientist commenting on your subject. Keep it up
This series is just like the movie "Double Indemnity" in that within the first handful of minutes you already know what the ending is going to be... yet that movie, and this series, have spun an entire thriller out of how exactly the ending came about.
I imagine part of the issue of discovery is that informed skeptics would quickly recognize his nonsensical data, immediately assume his procedure was flawed and move on to the next article.
Brings the whole meaning to “Fake it till you make it”.