Scribd
Upload
8 views

Lecture3-Simplifications

The document discusses two key simplifications in the scientific method: the theoretical basis of observation and the complexity of hypothesis testing. It emphasizes that observations are influenced by theoretical knowledge, which helps distinguish significant factors from irrelevant ones, and that hypothesis testing often involves multiple potential explanations for mismatches between theory and experiment. Overall, it highlights the intertwined nature of theory, observation, and experimentation in scientific practice.

Uploaded by

chinman8964
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
8 views

Lecture3-Simplifications

The document discusses two key simplifications in the scientific method: the theoretical basis of observation and the complexity of hypothesis testing. It emphasizes that observations are influenced by theoretical knowledge, which helps distinguish significant factors from irrelevant ones, and that hypothesis testing often involves multiple potential explanations for mismatches between theory and experiment. Overall, it highlights the intertwined nature of theory, observation, and experimentation in scientific practice.

Uploaded by

chinman8964
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 15

SCNC1111

Scientific Method and Reasoning


Lecture 3
Two Simplifications of
the Idealized Scientific Method
Dr. William M.Y. Cheung

1
The Nature of Scientific Practice

We are now going to discuss two key simplifications


made by our scientific method:
• The theoretical basis of observation.
• The complexity of hypothesis testing.
These examples teach us that there is no clear
separation or straightforward relationship between
theory, observation, and experiment.
Experiment
& Theory
Observation

http://mirror-uk-rb1.gallery.hd.org/ http://organizationalpsychologies.com/
Effective Observation needs Theory
Recall the requirement that observations should be
made under a wide variety of circumstances before
making a generalization:
What factors are significant in determining
the boiling point of water? How do you know
what factors are
A. Air pressure significant?
B. Purity of the water
C. Method of heating
What if you are the
D. Material of the container first scientist to
E. Geographical location study this?Hart-Davis
© Adam
Example: Hertz and the Detection of Radio
Waves

Heinrich Hertz (1857-94)

http://okinawa.nict.go.jp
http://es.wikipedia.org
Example: Hertz and the Detection of Radio
Waves
If Hertz were totally unguided by theory in the
observations that he made, he would have had to
record:
• the appearance of sparks at the critical locations in
his electrical circuit
• dimensions of his circuit
• colour of the meters
• dimensions of the laboratory
• the state of the weather
• size of his shoes, etc.

Hertz never, in fact, arrived at the correct speed of


radio waves because their reflection from the walls of
his laboratory interfered with his results. Heinrich Hertz (1857-94)
The dimensions of Hertz’s laboratory were in fact
highly relevant!
http://es.wikipedia.org
6
Effective Observation needs Theory

• ‘Significant’ factors can only be distinguished from


‘irrelevant’ ones by bringing in our theoretical
knowledge of the situation.
• Unless we can eliminate some ‘irrelevant’ factors,
we’ll never be able to generalize.
Since we don’t know in advance what factors are
relevant, we need some theory to guide us.
Observations are Always Made Using
Theoretical Language

Compare the following ‘observation’ statements:


A. The electron beam was repelled by the North Pole of
the magnet.
B. The gas in the cooker wouldn’t light.
C. The heart is pumping blood around the body.
As science progresses, new theoretical terms are
invented and become part of our ‘observational’
language.
The theoretical basis of observation!
The Complexity of Hypothesis Testing
FAULT CAUSE REMEDY
Strong vibrations Washing machine not perfectly level Adjust special feet
during spin Transport bracket not removed Remove transport bracket
Washing load not evenly distributed Distribute washing evenly
Does not Mains plug not plugged in Insert plug
function on any Mains switch not on Turn on mains switch
programme
No power Check power supply
Electric circuit fuse failure Check fuse
Load door open Close load door

• When something is not working properly (i.e. a mismatch between


theory and experiment), there are many possible explanations.
• A hypothesis may not (and need not) be completely discarded right
away.
Example: Testing an Astronomical Theory
To derive a prediction of the position of a planet
observed through a telescope, we will need:
A prediction derived from the theory under test.
 Previouspositions of the planet and the Sun and
possibly other planets (initial conditions).
 Corrections
to the path of the light through the Earth’s
atmosphere (optical theory).
If the planet is not seen at the predicted position, any
one of these factors may be at fault!
10
Example: Testing an Astronomical Theory
To derive a prediction of the position of a planet
observed through a telescope, we will need:
This
 is why
A prediction theories
derived from are
the theory under test. not

abandoned
Previous immediately
positions of the planet and the Sun and
possibly other planets (initial conditions).
following
 anof unfavourable
Corrections to the path the light through the Earth’s
atmosphere (optical theory).
experimental outcome!
If the planet is not seen at the predicted position, any
one of these factors may be at fault!
11
Example: Observations of the Size of Venus

Before the invention of the


telescope, it was universally
accepted that the size of Venus did
not vary throughout the year.
This was in direct contradiction with
the Copernican (sun-centered)
theory of the universe!

But it assumed that the size of


small light sources can be
estimated accurately with the
naked eye. Source: wikipedia
Example: Observations of the Size of Venus

Before the invention of the


telescope, it was universally
Observation statements are accepted that the size of Venus did
not vary throughout the year.
never absolutely certain!
This was in direct contradiction with
the Copernican (sun-centered)
theory of the universe!

But it assumed that the size of


small light sources can be
estimated accurately with the
naked eye. Source: wikipedia
Example: Testing an Astronomical Theory
…and Discovery!
 Nineteenth-century observations of the planet
Uranus diverged considerably from predictions
based on Newton’s theory.
 Thiswas because they failed to take into
account the existence of a new planet, later
named Neptune.
An apparent falsification was turned into a
triumphant confirmation!
Source: NASA
Summary
There is no clear separation or straightforward
relationship between theory, observation, and
experiment:
• The theoretical basis of observation:
– We make theoretical assumptions about relevant factors.
– Theory is built into even our most basic ‘observation
statements’.
• The complexity of hypothesis testing:
– We need additional data, assumptions, and auxiliary
theories to test a hypothesis.
– Observation statements and experiments are never totally
beyond doubt.

You might also like