From The Writer's Desk: Untold Stories in Science Writing

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

This article was published in Scientific American’s former blog network and reflects the views of the author, not necessarily those of Scientific American


In the series, "From The Writer's Desk," I'll describe what I do for a living as a writer and ideas I have for advancing my craft.

By devising inflation theory, considered by many in physics to be the best explanation of why the universe currently looks the way it does, cosmologist Alan Guth at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology probably ranks among one of the most important physicists alive today. He suggested the cosmos expanded staggeringly in size a sliver of a second after it was born — a growth spurt that would help explain, among other things, why the universe is as extraordinarily uniform as it is today, with only very tiny fluctuations in how matter and energy are distributed.

For this achievement, Russian billionaire Yuri Milner decided to award Guth one of his new Fundamental Physics Prize this year, instantly making the physicist a multimillionaire. In writing a story on the Milner prize for NOVA, I came across an article in The New York Times the $3 million appeared in a bank account of Guth's that only had $200. "Suddenly, it said, $3,000,200," Guth said.


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.


Why did Guth's bank account only have $200?

A journalistic dictum is to "kill your babies" — to ruthlessly cut out anything that doesn't serve the main thrust of your story, no matter how lovely. It's a good rule to follow, helping to prevent florid digressions. But just because a detail doesn't serve the main point of your story doesn't mean it's pointless — there are thousands of stories that end up on my figurative cutting room floor, answers to mysteries, glimpses of a larger world, items that regretfully often get tucked away in the electronic recesses of my computer to fade into digital obscurity.

Unless, say, I had a blog.

It turns out Guth wasn't languishing in poverty before this jackpot. That $200 bank account wasn't his main one. It was just one he happened to have. Since Guth didn't know whether the guy who called him over the phone claiming to be a Russian billionaire who wanted to give him $3 million was for real or not, Guth cautiously gave him details to a relatively expendable account and waited to see what happened. I'd wager he was rather happy with the result.

The bad thing about writing for others for a living is there are stories no one else would really care to pay to run. The good thing about writing for yourself is that you only have to really answer to yourself.

You can email me regarding From The Writer's Desk at toohardforscience@gmail.com.

Charles Q. Choi is a frequent contributor to Scientific American. His work has also appeared in The New York Times, Science, Nature, Wired, and LiveScience, among others. In his spare time, he has traveled to all seven continents.

More by Charles Q. Choi

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