Sometimes prototype systems (let's use computer systems) can prove the positives and negatives of having a particular system to work operationally. The prototype can be developed independently by a company or as part of a contract or contract proposal. The buyer can then choose what is best for their operational needs. The other possibility is that the potential buyer sees from the prototype and cost that the system is not practical or affordable. If the latter happens the company building the prototype could be "stuck" with it, or sell it to the highest bidder.
Another possibility is that the system looks pretty good and only a few changes would have to be made to satisfy the buyer (user). This why you see only financially stable and well off companies rather than "gamblers" building prototypes. So you see there are variables of having to eat the cost all the way up to making big money on prototype systems for the seller. For the buyer they recognize the good or the bad of using such a system operationally.
Other prototypes (besides computer systems) would be electric cars, next generation Doppler RADARs, stealth military equipment, smarter smart phones and an extraction system of petroleum from oil shale.
In a discovery prototype, normally built during the analysis phase, the intuit is to better understand people's needs and not functionality. That what's evolutionary prototype is for. It is deemed to prove capabilities according with its technology to meet the business needs. Two questions must be answered when using the prototyping method: -have we proven the technology is going to perform as expected? -has the customer understood its potential of the new system?
Sure, why not? I would think it just has to be a decent idea, with a Prototype to prove it.
The presence of an uncontrolled variable might be revealed.a failed simulation does prove something but its limited on what you can prove
A controlled variable means that it stays the same while other substances change. This helps prove the exact changes in an experiment.
(in the US) That is the beauty of the US Legal System. You do NOT have to prove that you are not guilty, the prosecution must prove that you ARE guilty.
It means that you prove that an equation is true for ALL values of the variable or variables involved.
It depends on the context of which water is in. Water can be a dependent or independent variable depending on the experiment, and what you are trying to prove or disprove of your hypothesis, so there isn't an answer. It all depends on the context in which water is in.
Unemployment
galileo
While survey data can show correlations between variables, it does not necessarily prove causation. Other factors may be influencing the relationship observed in the survey. To establish causation, additional research such as experiments or longitudinal studies are typically needed.
Correlation in research studies shows a relationship between two variables, but it does not prove that one variable causes the other. Causation, on the other hand, indicates that changes in one variable directly result in changes in another variable.
No a correlation method does not prove any kind of cause the only method that will prove Cause and Effect would be a Experiment Lab(hypothesis, Control group, Independent Variable ext...)