New Issue: Science’s Impossible Questions. Read Now

The Age of Discovery: What Would You Study If You Lived Forever? [Poll]

Leading scientists answer that question in Scientific American. Cast your vote for the best proposal and suggest ideas of your own

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Many research questions cannot be answered in the course of a single lifetime. Davide Castelvecchi, a contributing editor for Scientific American, has long-wondered what scientists would study if they could live for hundreds or thousands of years—or even indefinitely. Recently he put the question to leading investigators in their fields, reporting on their replies in "Questions for the Next Million Years," in our September 2012 issue.

A summary of the replies appears below. Which idea do you like best? Vote for one below. You can compare your answer with those of other voters here.

We'd also like to hear your ideas for other studies that would need centuries or more to carry out. Post your thoughts in the comments section below.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Scientific American Magazine Vol 307 Issue 3This article was published with the title “The Age of Discovery: What Would You Study If You Lived Forever? [Poll]” in Scientific American Magazine Vol. 307 No. 3 ()
doi:10.1038/scientificamerican092012-2OYXk8RGyGa5LLW6FJM9y4

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe