tanszek:oktatas:techcomm:information_-_basics:scientific_method
Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
Both sides previous revisionPrevious revisionNext revision | Previous revision | ||
tanszek:oktatas:techcomm:information_-_basics:scientific_method [2024/09/16 08:16] – knehez | tanszek:oktatas:techcomm:information_-_basics:scientific_method [2024/09/16 08:48] (current) – knehez | ||
---|---|---|---|
Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
4) **Predictions** based on the hypothesis or method (deduction). Every scientific method will necessarily involve certain forecasts. The ones which prove to be useful for further scientific progress have to be tested. | 4) **Predictions** based on the hypothesis or method (deduction). Every scientific method will necessarily involve certain forecasts. The ones which prove to be useful for further scientific progress have to be tested. | ||
- | The hypotheses made during the scientific progress have to be examined. One of the criteria during these tests is called falsifiability. This criterion comes from Karl Popper (a scientific philosopher). | + | The hypotheses made during the scientific progress have to be examined. One of the criteria during these tests is called falsifiability. This criterion comes from //Karl Popper// (a scientific philosopher). |
Falsifiability in this case has to be seen in the following way: if there is any kind of way (even just logical) which can contradict our hypothesis, then it is falsifiable. (For example: all swans are white. Of course there are black swans so the statement is not true, therefore falsifiable). | Falsifiability in this case has to be seen in the following way: if there is any kind of way (even just logical) which can contradict our hypothesis, then it is falsifiable. (For example: all swans are white. Of course there are black swans so the statement is not true, therefore falsifiable). | ||
- | Criticism of the Popper method: If the observation is inconsistent with the theory, then it is equally possible that the theory is correct or wrong or the required information is insufficient or false. (Astronomical example: our observations about Uranus let us predict that its movement behavior contradicts Newtonian laws. Levellier and Adams tried to explain this by saying that this movement is caused by an unknown planet’s interference. Galle was the one who managed to find Neptune, which was unknown up to that time. | + | Criticism of the //Popper' |
5) **Experiments and empirical verification**: | 5) **Experiments and empirical verification**: | ||
Line 26: | Line 26: | ||
flowchart TD | flowchart TD | ||
A[Observation] --> B[Define Problem] --> C[Set Hypothesis/ | A[Observation] --> B[Define Problem] --> C[Set Hypothesis/ | ||
- | | + | |
</ | </ |
tanszek/oktatas/techcomm/information_-_basics/scientific_method.1726474562.txt.gz · Last modified: 2024/09/16 08:16 by knehez