maybe serendipity is a confirmation bias, an ev psych hack to encourage exploration and experimentation. is it really true that learning naturally turns up more good than bad? or is ecclesiastes right and learning is grief and sorrow? could one set up a controlled experimental study to quantify serendipity? do i really want to know the findings? of course i do. as a duty, it's important. as frank herbert said: the open eye is better, no matter what it sees. but strangely i dread the answer.