The Scientific Method For Beginners

Hi Subbie,The quibbles and subtle points you bring up I see very easily and clearly as being a part of the list of steps given at the start by Dr. Adequate. Specifically, you would want to include a modification of the hypothesis. This is clearly a part of the first step, "(1) Formulate a hypothesis." This your detail, is for me ridiculous. Keeping it simple (void of legalese) lends itself to wider application. The fine points are decided on an individual basis and any scientist will be able to correctly apply the scientific method for his specific situation or area of research. Peer review will show if the choices made, fit. I could not disagree more with that final sentence. "Genuine problems" bring down hypotheses and theories. Assuming a hypothesis or theory generally fits, tiny incongruences are the meat of trying to find out where a hypothesis or theory is flawed. The first part of your quote I see as true but those points too fit squarely, for me, in the outline Dr. Adequate gave.

Hi AZPaul3,The points you bring up as missing, I see as being present; clearly present. Wanting to include "peer review" and experimental "replication" is a part of:

quote:

---

(3) Compare the predictions against observation.
&
(4) If reality corresponds with the predictions of the hypothesis, ....

---

Specifically including your two items far overreaches any useful purpose. It is needless addition to already listed points. "Short and clear" this is a sought after goal to be maintained in the listing of the method. Needless complication is self defeating in this case.

To clarify about the meaning of hypothesis from another thread I would like to post here. Although you may be a chemist (and never used the scientific method), and think you already know what a scientific hypothesis is, you should be aware that you have not demonstrated any sign of knowing what it is, except to the negative. At least review the material that you may have learned and merely forgotten. Wiki has a pretty good description of what it is. HYPOTHESISTake note of where it is stated that a hypothesis is never proven.Edited by CosmicChimp, : No reason given.

For whatever reason I did not realize that you meant a specific theory (ToE). I responded to the idea of theories in general. I agree that the ToE is not easily brought down by future incongruences. Especially since ToE is one of the best supported theories we have (if not outright the best).Regarding the first point, is your request not superfluous and distracting considering the value attached to having clean and simple steps to the scientific method? I'm considering also the teaching value associated with keeping a strategy, method or procedure simple.Take for example the English 26 letter alphabet. Is it not better to have each character limited to one symbol?Edited by CosmicChimp, : Rhetorical questions need a question mark?

I really don't agree with what I see as your malleable version of theories. I take a more black and white approach to theories. I'll wait for other forum members to weigh in on your view of the issue as I have interpreted it.Including or excluding your more detailed version of the method, revisions etc, is I think a matter of opinion, I can see your view.What about the value of economy of verbiage?Edited by CosmicChimp, : spelling