Science exploration is fascinating and adventurous. It's hard to imagine what will happen next or what will be discovered. Science research is like wandering endlessly in a rainforest full of unknowns and there won't be any guide showing the scientists which is the right road. The science history is never that fluent and effortless. Instead,  it is unpredictable and always take the wrong method. As long as the accurate usage of the recent research cannot be foreseen, researchers thus should not limit their investigations to only those areas in which immediate application is doomed.         Science research is not a task. A task has a definite destination, a certain required standard. But science research is not normal works which do not need any innovations and break-throughs. Most of the time, the scientist himself cannot make sure the outcome of the results, sometimes new theories being put forward, sometimes imbued with meaningless data, other times new field of study is involved in. Take the discovery of the Penicillin for example, Sir Alexander Fleming observed that colonies of the bacterium Staphylococcus aureus could be destroyed by the mold Penicillium notatum, proving that there was an antibacterial agent there in principle. This principle later lead to medicines that could kill certain types of disease-causing bacteria inside the body.  At the time, however, the importance of Alexander Fleming's discovery was not known. Use of penicillin did not begin until the 1940s when Howard Florey and Ernst Chain isolated the active ingredient and developed a powdery form of the medicine.                   Therefore, whether the current research would be of any influential change factor in the future is  unpredictable. The scientists should engage in the research and be less aware of the juicy consequences.                   Science research cannot be targeted too accurately, if not the result will possibily be disappointed. Back in college, all the engineer-major students are required to accomplish some experiments for the physics an d other related subjects. As we open up the science-lab introduction book, we will see that exact result will be expected from the little observation on our own without which the experiment must be wrong. Just like the juvenile experiment in high school, the "experiment" with a accurate and expected results is actually a confirmation to a already-known theories,like the Newton's Laws the basic, not the science investigation which calls for innovations and new theoies corrected the old ones.                    Even if the research has a accurate expecting results, on occasions which the team cannot accomplish the results no matter what they try the scicentists may be dragged into a dilemma and worried unnecessarily. The target will limit their immaginations and force them to think in a orthodox way by which no sparkles will ever occured. Plus, the special target for future application will be a pressure to the researchers. Money, Fame, actual application, self-fufillment, everybody wants them, so do the researchers. Once the irrevelant factors get involved, it would be hard for the scientists to concentrate solely to their research. The Nobel prize always praise the olds. Because many science's discovery actual use can only be seen in decades which prevent those quick-seekers .                    The researchers should dabble in a variety of fields and should not limit the research to those immediate practical application. But on certain occasions, researchers should avoid some obviously useless project. The useless project consumes money and cares and would be detrimental to other potential useful research.                     In sum, the science research destination is hard to defined and a heart urging for the applicatio and breakthoughs is not good for the research. Also, the researchers judgement cannot be that accurate and convincing. It would be unecessary to circumspect research only to the applicable ones.