> The researchers came across this entirely by accident, and one of the questions that remains is how the trout is able to sense its surroundings well enough to intentionally take advantage of the effect.
Should have been:
The researchers came across this entirely by accident, and one of the questions that remains is how ignorant we are about some of the most basic aspects of the world.
Hard disagree. "How is the trout able to sense..." is a good question and answering it will advance our understanding. Navel-gazing about ignorance will not.
you know this research was published in 2006, and is based on earlier work (from the citations you can see papers from the early 1970s onwards) which suggests the ignorance might be more localised ;)
I believe GP meant 'figuratively' (a common modern use of 'literally,' disconcertingly) and could also be mixing unrelated idioms such as swim like a fish and swimming upstream, though it is commonly known salmon swim upstream, I'm not sure this fluid dynamics epiphany changes anything there. If it could technically be incorrect to say salmon swim upstream, how should it be phrased correctly? Salmon get sucked upstream?
Should have been:
The researchers came across this entirely by accident, and one of the questions that remains is how ignorant we are about some of the most basic aspects of the world.