No
false
In order to transform the observation of a natural phenomenon into a valid scientific experiment the following conditions must be fulfilled * It has to be a quantitative observation, that is a relationship between quantities expressing the measures of physical or chemical variables has to be obtained; * The way in which the measure has been achieved has to be carefully described so that the measure can be repeated with exactly the same procedure by different scientists, in different places and in different times; * The measurement error has to be carefully evaluated on the ground of the characteristics of the adopted measure procedure and instruments; * Every time the measure is repeated by different persons in different places and in different times the same results have to be obtained within the measurement errors; For example the so called cold fusion is not a valid scientific experiment since the results obtained in the first experiment by Fleischmann and Pons are not reproducible in other labs and the experiment procedure has never been explained in detail. Naturally, if someone claims a result but the claim is based on an observation that is not a valid experiment, it is not a scientific result, but nothing can be told on the base phenomenon, simply it has not been observed correctly.
You don't want a lot of the factors && different things in an experiment to be changed because if they are all changed every now and then, it will completely change the experiment.
the factor in an experiment that is missing the variable but is the same as other facotors in every other way.
According to the scientific method they do it because the first time they try the experiment, the results might be wrong. In the case of which many experiments are being tested multiple times, scientists want to make sure that there results are correctly answered.
no
false
Yes, you need to replicate the steps and conditions of the first experiment to be sure that you achieve the same result.
Read every step of the procedure to make sure you understand it .
You don't want a lot of the factors && different things in an experiment to be changed because if they are all changed every now and then, it will completely change the experiment.
You don't want a lot of the factors && different things in an experiment to be changed because if they are all changed every now and then, it will completely change the experiment.
In order to transform the observation of a natural phenomenon into a valid scientific experiment the following conditions must be fulfilled * It has to be a quantitative observation, that is a relationship between quantities expressing the measures of physical or chemical variables has to be obtained; * The way in which the measure has been achieved has to be carefully described so that the measure can be repeated with exactly the same procedure by different scientists, in different places and in different times; * The measurement error has to be carefully evaluated on the ground of the characteristics of the adopted measure procedure and instruments; * Every time the measure is repeated by different persons in different places and in different times the same results have to be obtained within the measurement errors; For example the so called cold fusion is not a valid scientific experiment since the results obtained in the first experiment by Fleischmann and Pons are not reproducible in other labs and the experiment procedure has never been explained in detail. Naturally, if someone claims a result but the claim is based on an observation that is not a valid experiment, it is not a scientific result, but nothing can be told on the base phenomenon, simply it has not been observed correctly.
the factor in an experiment that is missing the variable but is the same as other facotors in every other way.
A scientific theory is something that SHOULD happen each time and experiment is performed. A scientific law is something that WILL happen every time. Like if you drop something, it's a scientific law that it will hit the floor.
so scientists can compare result
Scientific knowledge is based on in every growing collection of facts about the natural world but it changed with new evidence or New interpretation .
Scientific knowledge is based on in every growing collection of facts about the natural world but it changed with new evidence or New interpretation .