These are the kinds of questions that physics tries to answer about the behavior of light and matter, the two things that the universe is made of. Until very recently in history, no progress was made in answering questions like these.
Worse than that, the wrong answers written by thinkers like the ancient Greek physicist Aristotle were accepted without question for thousands of years. Why is it that scientific knowledge has progressed more since the Renaissance than it had in all the preceding millennia since the beginning of recorded history? Undoubtedly the industrial revolution is part of the answer. Building its centerpiece, the steam engine, required improved techniques for precise construction and measurement early on, it was considered a major advance when English machine shops learned to build pistons and cylinders that fit together with a gap narrower than the thickness of a penny.
But even before the industrial revolution, the pace of discovery had picked up, mainly because of the introduction of the modern scientific method. Although it evolved over time, most scientists today would agree on something like the following list of the basic principles of the scientific method:.
Scientific theories are created to explain the results of experiments that were created under certain conditions. A successful theory will also make new predictions about new experiments under new conditions.
Eventually, though, it always seems to happen that a new experiment comes along, showing that under certain conditions the theory is not a good approximation or is not valid at all.
If an experiment disagrees with the current theory, the theory has to be changed, not the experiment. The requirement of predictive power means that a theory is only meaningful if it predicts something that can be checked against experimental measurements the theorist did not already have at hand. That is, a theory should be testable. Explanatory value means that many phenomena should be accounted for with few basic principles.
Collecting lots of data without being able to find any basic underlying principles is not science. An experiment should be treated with suspicion if it only works for one person, or only in one part of the world. Anyone with the necessary skills and equipment should be able to get the same results from the same experiment. As an example of the cycle of theory and experiment, a vital step toward modern chemistry was the experimental observation that the chemical elements could not be transformed into each other, e.
This led to the theory that chemical reactions consisted of rearrangements of the elements in different combinations, without any change in the identities of the elements themselves. The theory worked for hundreds of years, and was confirmed experimentally over a wide range of pressures and temperatures and with many combinations of elements. Only in the twentieth century did we learn that one element could be trans-formed into one another under the conditions of extremely high pressure and temperature existing in a nuclear bomb or inside a star.
That observation did not completely invalidate the original theory of the immutability of the elements, but it showed that it was only an approximation, valid at ordinary temperatures and pressures. The scientific method as described here is an idealization, and should not be understood as a set procedure for doing science. Successful science also has more to do with luck, intuition, and creativity than most people realize, and the restrictions of the scientific method do not stifle individuality and self-expression any more than the fugue and sonata forms stifled Bach and Haydn.
I think that is going too far. In order to test my hypothesis I had to have controlled testing methods. For instance; I had a set amount of people to test the tan on that would show some consistence if any in the results. I ask three teenage girls and three teenage guys to use the tanning bed two times a week for their entire four years in high school. This study took years to finish conducting because the end results of cancer could possibly show up till later in their lives.
However, I ask these six people to use the same tanning bed, the , for twenty minutes every two times a week they go tanning. They all had to go to the same tanning salon. These were controlled variables that would help benefit in the end results. Now that I tested my hypothesis, I now check and determine my results. Retrieved 11, , from https: The Scientific Method By: The Scientific Method Scientific Method pg.
Scientific Method Step Essay Words | 3 Pages. Scientific Method Matching Exercise Resource In Part I, match each example from Column 2 with the correct step of the scientific method in Column 1. Explain the reasoning for your choice in Part II.
The Scientific Method - The Scientific Method is the standardized procedure that scientists are supposed to follow when conducting experiments, in order to try to construct a reliable, consistent, and non-arbitrary representation of our surroundings.
Although it evolved over time, most scientists today would agree on something like the following list of the basic principles of the scientific method: Science is a cycle of theory and experiment. Scientific theories are created to explain the results of experiments that were created under certain conditions. Tracing the Scientific Method Essay In many ways, the scientific method is the foundation for everything that science has discovered and accomplished. The scientific method represents a methodical and useful tool for asking questions and seeking answers.
The scientific method is used by all scientists all around the world. It’s a way for researchers to find cause and effect in experiments. The first step to the scientific . What is the scientific method? It is a process used to find answers to questions about the world around us. It begins with a question that comes from observation and is answered through an organized method of conducting and analyzing an experiment.