0
What else can I help you with?
What is a logical interpretation of observations based on what scientists already know?
Hypothesis.An inference.Hypothesis
What is an explination for observations based on reasoning from what you already know?
An explanation for observations based on reasoning from what you already know is often referred to as a hypothesis. It involves using existing knowledge and logical reasoning to interpret data or phenomena, allowing us to make predictions or understand underlying mechanisms. This process is fundamental in scientific inquiry, where observations lead to questions that are addressed through research and experimentation. Essentially, it's a way to connect the dots between known facts and new observations to derive meaningful conclusions.
When is a theory considered absolutely true in science?
Actually never, a theory is always in danger of being replaced by a better explanation. This does not invalidate the theory, it just means it was not as comprehensive and explanation of observations as was thought. An example of this is Newtons laws of gravity, they are still usable but we now know that Einstein's space/time bending by the mass of an object is a more comprehensive explanation.
What is the difference between explanation and prediction?
Explanation is where you KNOW the topic and you can explain it. Predicting is where you want to know what will happen in the future.
Why must a scientist begin by making observations?
In order for a scientist to solve a problem or learn more about a phenomenon, they must first see it in order to know that it exists. Also, observations allow scientists to make educated guesses, called hypotheses, to try and explain what is causing a phenomenon.
An explanation for observations based on reasoning from what you already know?
A prediction
What is a logical interpretation of observations based on what scientists already know?
Hypothesis.An inference.Hypothesis
What is an explination for observations based on reasoning from what you already know?
An explanation for observations based on reasoning from what you already know is often referred to as a hypothesis. It involves using existing knowledge and logical reasoning to interpret data or phenomena, allowing us to make predictions or understand underlying mechanisms. This process is fundamental in scientific inquiry, where observations lead to questions that are addressed through research and experimentation. Essentially, it's a way to connect the dots between known facts and new observations to derive meaningful conclusions.
When is a theory considered absolutely true in science?
Actually never, a theory is always in danger of being replaced by a better explanation. This does not invalidate the theory, it just means it was not as comprehensive and explanation of observations as was thought. An example of this is Newtons laws of gravity, they are still usable but we now know that Einstein's space/time bending by the mass of an object is a more comprehensive explanation.
How are scientific theories and scientific laws similar?
Laws are consistent observations and always happen Theories are attempts to explain why certain laws are true.
What is the explanation of where the intellect is trained to know the truth-?
Intelligence analysis is the explanation of where the intelligence is trained to know the truth.
What is the difference between explanation and prediction?
Explanation is where you KNOW the topic and you can explain it. Predicting is where you want to know what will happen in the future.
What is the explanation of where the intellect is trained to know the truth?
Intelligence analysis is the explanation of a situation where the intellect is trained to know the truth.
What are some examples of Scientific Explanation?
scientific explanation is....... wait why am i answering this... i dont know is the answer...
How do you know that pulsars exist?
By observations and detailed examination.
How do you know that evolution is a theory?
It is a well-established, well-tested, well-supported, comprehensive model for the explanation of a well-defined set of observations in various branches of science. That is the definition of what a scientific theory must be, and thus evolutionary theory is a scientific theory.
What is this question asking me to answer - please do not answer the actual question for me though?
NOT THE ANSWERSorry, I didn't know how to put a subquestion. This is a part of a lab I am doing. What am I being asked to anwser?Did any of the sediments remain in suspension? If so, which one? Were these results consistent with your observations of each sediment sample alone?
