0
Is a scientific hypothesis accepted as true after an experiments conclusion seems to support it?
Wiki User
∙ 11y ago
Not always. This is kind of hard to explain but sometimes, one of your variables will make the whole expirement kinda slide and the data might be wrong. Just asking, is this a science fair project :D
Wiki User
∙ 11y ago
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
Why is the cell theory accepted today?
Because it has been proven by many experiments by many scientists
How does bias in the data affect experimental result?
Bias in the data is inaccurate data. Any error in data will yield false results for the experiment. Experiments by their nature must be exact. Many trials are not accepted until the results can be duplicated.
What is the difference between believe and belief?
Believe is a verb, it indicates that a person has come to some kind of conclusion or has accepted something as being factual or true, as in, I believe that you are a good person. Belief is a noun, it is a specific assertion, conclusion, or datum of whatever sort, that someone has accepted as true. It is my belief that you are a good person. Belief in evil spirits is superstitious. Hence, I do not believe in evil spirits.
How does an idea achieve the status of a scientific theory?
A scientific theory is a deductive statement accepted by a recognized element of the scientific community, and that represents the only possible conclusion of a thorough, rigorous, and disciplined series of scientific testings of successive critically reasoned hypotheses. A scientific theory is often a set of statements that collectively describe how one facet of the universe works. Unlike common theories, scientific theories must be:consistent with all existing scientific laws and constants;consistent with, and supported by, all reproducible scientific observations and experimental results; andself consistent - that is, it does not contradict itself in any way.#1 is questionable. Darwin's theory of evolution by natural selection directly contradicted and invalidated Lamarck's theory of evolution by the inheritability of acquired traits.A scientific theory must be:1. Naturalistic. It cannot invoke the intervention of a deity, or of a "superior" being or beings, or of unknown physical laws not in operation today (a common creationist claim). It also must be supported by observable facts and reproducible experiments. "Cold fusion theory" is naturalistic, as it does not invoke divine or supernatural intervention, but it is not supported by reproducible experiments. It is therefore not scientific.2. Falsifiable. It must be open to being disproven when a newer theory, accounting better for all the facts, is formulated. To claim that present life-forms were created by an all-powerful, essentially unknowable Divine Creator, is an unfalsifiable claim, and therefore scientifically invalid.3. Predictive. A scientific theory should be able to predict what will happen under specific conditions. Because creationism cannot predict anything (since everything depends on the will of the Creator), it is not scientific. In the field of evolution, predictability works this way: given certain environmental conditions, scientists can predict that the life-forms developing under those conditions will show adaptations to take the greatest advantage of such conditions. For example, it can be safely predicted that, in the Sahara desert, life-forms, whether animal or plant, will have metabolisms that work to conserve optimally moisture. Evolution does not specifically predict the development of camels, or true xerophyte plants, but any animals or plants that make their permanent home in the Sahara (or other extremely arid areas) will necessarily show water-conserving metabolisms.A scientific theory is a hypothesis based on a scientific topic.
How are a theory and a set of hypotheses related?
As long as you haven't scientifically proven that a statement you make or a phenomenon you describe is actually true and repeatable all over the world, then you may call this statement a hypothesis. It is something you personally believe in, but the rest of the world will not believe you unless you test your hypothesis and prove it right. (Needless to say, if your test results prove your hypothesis wrong, then you need to start over and rephrase the hypothesis.) After repeated empirical testing with getting the same results every time, and when you believe your hypothesis is right, then you might announce your findings to the world by presenting a theory. This theory is accepted by your peers, but only if they get the same results under similar conditions in their own labs. And if your theory is truly revolutionary, resulting in a so-called change of paradigm, then you may expect a Nobel prize at some point.Answer 2:A hypothesis is a guess or proposed explanation for an observed phenomenon. It's a starting point for further investigation. A theory is much more substantial. To become a theory, after the hypothesis is proposed it is tested in various ways. For example, theories can be used to make predictions which can then be tested. And, a after testing a theory has not been contradicted by these tests.
What is the difference between a scientific theory and a hunch?
A hunch is unsubstantiated. Scientific theory is theory in which an idea or even a hunch has been thouroughly tested- thru a hypothesis, testing the hypothesis, and results based on the scientific method. It is supported by other experiments and generally accepted by professionals in the field
Is a scientific hypothesis accepted if there is no way to demonstrate that it is wrong?
It is accepted if the data support it.
Why is it important for experiments to be written in scientific method?
All experiments are based on hypothesis that has to be tested for truth. All scientific experiments therefore follow a logical methodology to arrive at a conclusion that must have a universal result that becomes universal accepted truth in Scientific experiments. It is necessary to follow the universal methodology by collection of the data for analysis to determine the elements or functional relationship in the experimental process. It is similar to any mathematical function that proceeds from one step to the next with the application of a universal formula that is written when solved.
Is a scientific hypothesis a accepted if there is no way to demonstrate that the hypothesis is wrong?
If you develop an experiment that truly demonstrates that the hypothesis is wrong*, then the hypothesis will lose its acceptance in the scientific community.* Such an experiment would have to be repeatable by other scientists AND accepted by interested scientists as a proof that the hypothesis is wrong.
What happens if more than one hypothesis is put forward to explain the same observations?
For a hypothesis to be put forward as a scientific hypothesis, the scientific method requires that one can test it. A working hypothesis is a provisionally accepted hypothesis proposed for further research.
What is a conclusion based on information?
A conclusion sums up all your observations,inference, and hypothesis in the experiment based on the data collected. This is to prove whether your hypothesis is accepted or rejected.
What is the different shape of scientific method?
The scientific method is a scientific method for systematically acquiring new knowledge. The scientific method is typically applied to experiments, involving taking a hypothesis and using it to get applicable results.
Why a new scientific hypothesis might be accepted or rejected?
Observational evidence
What determines if a scientific conclusion is accurate or not?
A conclusion is accepted if its Results can be duplicated in any Lab, anywhere.
How does a scientific hypothesis become an accepted theory?
when there s proof to back it up with evidence or an experiment to test the hypothesis
Is a scientist hypothesis accepted if there is no way to prove that they hypothesis is wrong?
If you develop an experiment that truly demonstrates that the hypothesis is wrong*, then the hypothesis will lose its acceptance in the scientific community. * Such an experiment would have to be repeatable by other scientists AND accepted by interested scientists as a proof that the hypothesis is wrong.
Is a scientific hypothesis accepted if there is no way way to prove that the hypothesis is wrong?
No. Not being able to prove something is NOT the same as it being true.
