In society there is usually a sharp dividing line between success and failure.
Failing a test means you're not good enough, while getting a promotion means you're good enough. There are many examples like these, but there is also a perception in which there is no such dividing line.
A scientist is constantly conducting experiments to confirm or reject a hypothesis. There is always the possibility of success or failure of the experiment. In case it succeeds, it continues to the next experiment bearing in mind the hypothesis it previously confirmed.
But if he fails, it does not mean that he has failed as a scientist, but that the hypothesis he is testing is wrong. Thus, it has the possibility to continue in the next experiment of a new hypothesis.
This process is characterized by a continuous flow of success and failure, with the goal of ultimate success. For the scientist, these (inevitable) failures are nothing more than redirections in how to handle the problem. As the great inventor Thomas Edison said: