But he's not wrong, research really isn't just random playing (which I think is obviously still good and fun and should be done for it's own sake, of which this

But he's not wrong, research really isn't just random playing (which I think is obviously still good and fun and should be done for it's own sake, of which this blog post is a great example though it probably wouldn't be worth the time of a formal research project). It's the reason why "good questions" and seemingly arbitrary or trivial problems - especially those which motivates the development of much deeper machinery or discovery in order to solve them - is widely appreciated across all fields of math (poincare conjecture, galoi's proof of the unsolvability of the quintic, fermat's last theorem, riemann zeta's zeroes etc.) In all cases those good questions where not randomly cooked up but posed from a previous, more direct line of inquiry, of which the originator usually had a good insight into. Though for the examples I gave the unexpected depth certainly could not have been anticipated beforehand.