Fall 2005 ASTR 1120-001 The Scientific Method

Fall 2005 ASTR 1120-001 Homepage

Fall 2005 ASTR 1120-001 General Astronomy: Stars & Galaxies: Project 0

The Scientific Method

Your task is give five (5) different statements about what the scientific method is. You should write down not only statements that you think are "correct", but statements that you think are "incorrect". By each statement, write whether you think it is correct or not. Feel free to express your own views: do not feel constrained to express what you think may be the views of the professor or of the book.

Here is a distillation of the various answers you gave

Asserted to be correct:

The 5 step way:
- Make a hypothesis
- Perform an experiment
- Gather data
- Test hypothesis
- Draw conclusions
A structured way to explain observed facts.
A structured way to arrive at truths about the natural world.
Relies on reproducible experiments or observations.
Quantitative.
Learning through trial and error.
Asserted to be incorrect:
A way to prove a theory.
Believing what authority tells you.
Accepts some truths as being unquestionable.
A unique, rigid set of rules.
Correct or incorrect:
The only way to make a valid argument.
Applies only to science, not to other disciplines.
Can answer only some questions.
You wouldn't use the scientific method to ponder the meaning of life.
A system by which nothing is ever proven, but remains forever a theory.
Excessive use of logic to answer worthless questions.

Prof's comment on the subject

In my experience science is a very human enterprise. It is fallible, full of prejudice and bigotry. In some ways science resembles a jungle in which theories and ideas constantly battle for survival. In the long run only the fittest theories survive, though in the short run there can be a considerable element of chance as to which ideas take hold and which do not.

In my view, science is unabashedly a search for truth. What distinguishes the scientific method is its ruthless treatment of truth: eventually, no hypothesis is accepted unless it makes reproducible quantitative predictions about the natural world. I say eventually because again science is a very human enterprise, and humans can have a hard time in recognizing when a hypothesis is or is not making reproducible quantitative predictions.

Notwithstanding the emphasis on observation and experiment, in practice a good part of science can remain disconnected from reality for an extended period of time. For example, M theory, the leading current candidate for the Theory of Everything, remains largely a mathematical theory, with little or no connection to observation and experiment. Yet M theory is tolerated as science because it is not yet fully understood, because it offers the prospect of fulfilling Einstein's dream of uniting all the laws of nature, and because of its mathematical beauty.

Curiously, no one commented on the fact that scientists are often guided by notions of simplicity and beauty in their quest for truth. For example, Einstein was motivated to come up with the General Theory of Relativity not because of some grand experimental or observational problem, but because of his intuition about how nature should work. It is a matter of astonishment that the Universe appears to be governed by mathematical laws of extraordinary elegance, and that those laws appear to be (perhaps) knowable by human beings.

Science, art, religion. Do they live together, or apart?

Is mathematics science?

Doug Duncan, Director of CU's Fiske Planetarium, had an educational colleague interview students at the start of his Intro Astronomy course on their attitudes to science:

Reasons Why Students Say They Don't Like Science

I'm a creative person, so I'd like to do something creative (not science!).
I'm not good at math; I'm not good at science (I can't do it).
It is not at all relevant to my life (why should I do it?).
I like to do things which are involving, and which involve other people.

Van Gogh's Starry Night Fall 2005 ASTR 1120-001 Homepage

Updated 2005 Aug 25