Want this question answered?
Absolutely, the scientific method is the very backbone of experimenting and only through experimenting can scientists make discoveries. The scientific method is necessary to ensure validity, and reliability, without it we can't trust the results to be accurate or reliable.
Yes. Blind (without hypothesis) experimenting, while occasionally producing useful data, is normally a real time waster. This is because data obtained from blind experimenting almost always requires a rigorous confirmation process anyway, before it can be used in scientific work.
Non-scientific questions are those that cannot be proven or disproven by experimenting (testing). Also non-scientific questions are vaguely written. Examples: Does god exist? Is cigarette smoke pretty?
Scientists use experiments to either confirm or disprove their hypotheses. Without this experimentation, science could not advance.
It is sometimes possible to arrive at a reasonable conclusion based on the information that is available, and be wrong. Without sufficient information it is sometimes impossible to arrive at the truth.
Absolutely, the scientific method is the very backbone of experimenting and only through experimenting can scientists make discoveries. The scientific method is necessary to ensure validity, and reliability, without it we can't trust the results to be accurate or reliable.
technology is needed for scientists to make discoveries. without all of their technology, they would have to do everything by hand and mind. All the math and all the work would take so much longer to do
It is not possible to answer the question without knowledge of the radius in metres.It is not possible to answer the question without knowledge of the radius in metres.It is not possible to answer the question without knowledge of the radius in metres.It is not possible to answer the question without knowledge of the radius in metres.
Scientific laws are based on scientific experiments, scientific conclusions after exhaustive tests, and they are also based on formerly scientific discoveries and experiments. Scientific evidence without a conclusive proof may be a false evidence. Scientific evidence doesn't exist. Science is not based on evidences, but on real results originated from a theory. Results are solid, palpable, real and cannot be doubted.
Yes. Blind (without hypothesis) experimenting, while occasionally producing useful data, is normally a real time waster. This is because data obtained from blind experimenting almost always requires a rigorous confirmation process anyway, before it can be used in scientific work.
Non-scientific questions are those that cannot be proven or disproven by experimenting (testing). Also non-scientific questions are vaguely written. Examples: Does god exist? Is cigarette smoke pretty?
Without the invention of new machines and technology , scientific discoveries that simply work and the Industrial Revolution could not have taken place. So new technology was necessary.
Without the invention of new machines and technology , scientific discoveries that simply work and the Industrial Revolution could not have taken place. So new technology was necessary.
Without a doubt. Scientific discoveries enable all types of technology. Without the discovery of electro- magnetic induction, the electricity turbine would not be possible. Perhaps a more recent and relevant example is this: 30 years ago scientists in CERN (the European particle physics laboratory in Switzerland) needed a way of sharing and accessing data. They put their heads to it, and came up with something. Bang. The Internet.
I am also without an answer
in a way, oxygen is one of the raw material in a way to start a fire. Without oxygen, it is not possible to start a fire.
The only two ways I know to do that is to steal it from bees or dig it out of your ear.