Earlier quoted context omitted.
I mean, LEGO employs some professionals who no doubt devote their career to understanding many things about LEGO. The part numbers, if assumed to also include things like brick stockpiles and production runs, planning of new bricks, set design requirements, etc. could easily be a major part of their job.
> LEGO employs some professionals who no doubt devote their career to understanding many things about LEGO That is not limited to LEGO: Some researchers from Lancaster University also were researching LEGO bricks (read: Playing around trying to set record-low temperatures for LEGO bricks); and found out they're excellent insulators at sub-kelvin temperatures: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21884755
You can put them in a vacuum. They don't degas much. They're magnet safe and can survive being in really high EM fields. They've got a high melting point. They don't become too brittle at sub-K temperatures. Blocks continue to mate as temperature varies -- Lego's process is fantastic at minimising temperature variation. They're really quite radiation resistant (many plastics fail horribly if you shoot them with >1 kGy). A child (or student!) can make a symmetric structure with them given a vague sketch design. A single "1x" wide Technik piece has a persistence length of about 80 cm. Structures you can build with lego are therefore really remarkably strong.
Every lego is made to insanely tight tolerances to published, well-known dimensions, and, best of all, if they break (an achievement!) you can buy another one for absolutely nothing in science-money terms. (The finance dept. look at you a bit weird when you put fifteen copies of "Spaceman playset" on an expenses claim form though).
I frankly think that most experimentalists somewhere in their life have some lego.
(I have a "Lego MRI" set that is only available to professionals!)