a history of the scientific method thales of miletus (a small town originally on the coast of...
Post on 03-Jan-2016
222 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
A History of the Scientific Method
Thales of Miletus (a small town originally on the coast of Turkey)
Pythagoras and Mathematics
c
a
b
a2 + b2 = c2
Plato and Knowledge
The universe is knowable--it just takes logic.
Roger Bacon and Empiricism
Observations tell us how nature works.
Rene Descartes and Rationalism
Intellect is enough to tell us how things work.
Not THIS Francis Bacon . . .
Sir Francis Bacon andthe Scientific Method
•People serve and interpret nature
•Truth is not derived from authority
•Knowledge is the fruit of experience
The Scientific Method Recognize what the question or problem actually
is Make an educated guess (aka “hypothesis”) as to
what’s causing it Predict further consequences of your hypothesis Perform experiments testing your predictions Formulate a rule governing what you see Repeat as necessary
Examples of “Bad Science” Intransigence in the face of compelling
evidence Not having a test for falseness (or
wrongness, if you prefer) “Fudging” data (equivalent to lying)
??
Mathematics & Science
Admittedly, mathematics can be a bit like a foreign language, but at least there are no “exception to the rule” problems. But nothing can so briefly state a scientific theory as an equation.
F=ma(“Force = mass times acceleration”, but really it’s a lot more than that!)
The Scientific Method vs. “Bad” Science as Applied to Air Resistance
Aristotle said that the rate at which objects fall depends upon their mass.
Galileo said that all objects fall at a constant rate of acceleration (9.8 m/s2 = 32 ft/s2).
My casual observations suggest that neither of these is correct.
Bad Science says . . .
It’s air resistance, Bonehead! Duhhhh! Let’s go to the next problem, in which we show that black is white and white is black and Bill Gates is the Anti-Christ . . . .
Good Science Says . . .
We seem to have a problem in that objects fall at different rates. Mass has an effect, but it’s not the only effect. Our hypothesis is that it is due to resistance from the air through which the object is falling.
Let’s make some predictions based upon our hypothesis: Greater cross-sectional area should lead to
greater effects from air resistance For two objects of equal cross-sectional
area, the heavier one falls at a greater rate of acceleration
The faster an object falls, the greater the air resistance
In a vacuum, all objects fall at equal rates
We now must test our predictions
Drop two objects of equal mass but different cross-sectional area
Drop two objects of equal cross-sectional area but different mass
Drop an object from a great height and see if it eventually stops accelerating
Create a vacuum and drop two very different objects
Bad Science says:
You just saw it happen. Why do you run that experiment again and again?
Nah, I don’t think that humidity or altitude would affect anything. We’ve covered it all.
We have our numbers. They’re precise enough.
Our hypothesis seems correct, but that doesn’t mean it’s complete: If the cross sectional area doubles/triples, does
the air resistance double/triple? A cube and a sphere can have the same cross
sectional area. Do they fall the same? Does the air resistance increase proportionally
with velocity? Does it increase faster? Slower?
What about resistance by gases other than air?
top related