(1) Ask a question about some aspect of nature.
(2) Use existing theory and/or available knowledge to reason out a hypothesis that answers the question.
(3) Test the hypothesis against empirical evidence (e.g. observable facts or data from controlled experiments).
(4) Based on the results obtained from (3), revise or discard the hypothesis.
(5) Based on the cummulative results of repeating steps 1-4, continue revising and developing the theory.
I would hafta say maybe..... Step 1...step 2....step 3..... Sorry, I had too be a little stinker. Good luck!
Pose the Problem
Pose a Theory to solve the problem
Test your theory
Make a hypothesis or tell the solution to the problem
There are actually several steps involved: 1) Hypothesis Statement--what you want to prove as true or false, 2) Experiment Outline includes variables (independent and dependent), observations, data collected, etc., 3) Procedure Details--listing all the steps involved in the experiment, 4) Result Statement-one sentence stating results, 5) Conclusion--explaining what the information tells you, 6) Application--how can this information help you. How can this information be applied in real life? and 7) Resources--giving credit to all who helped and sources where you got your information from.
Hope that helps
1- Find or ask a question you want answered
2. Propose a theory to answer the question
3 test the theory
3a while testing theory have situations- a control scinerio that isolates the axiom or question being postulated t.o determine if it occurs naturally.
4.Determine the experiments results
5. Retest experiment to determine if results can be repeated.
6. Test each outlying result as in #5.
7. Prepare conclusions on experiment results.
by emrldphx6 years ago
For those who are interested, I am putting together a primer on the difference between subjectivity and objectivity. Much of the disagreement in this forum is due to confusion between the two. We'll start with a...
by paarsurrey6 years ago
Science of itself does not present claims and reasons on issues; others interpret it wrongly; it is a useful tool of the humanity ; and if interpreted correctly it is not in contradiction of the truthful religion.
by Oztinato2 years ago
Is the scienctific method infallible?Like many ancient religions modern scientists regard their methods to be infallible. Is this the right attitude?
by Julie Grimes7 years ago
With some recent archaeological discoveries in India, and in South Africa has Darwin's evolution clouded our judgment about the creation of mankind? That's the question I would like to pose to all of you this...
by boyatdelhi5 years ago
Isn't evolution just a theory that remains unproven?
by paarsurrey16 months ago
As its name suggests it is useful in science only. It has not been designed for religion and or philosophy. Right? PleaseRegards
Copyright © 2018 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.