Validating Experimental Results
- The scientific community works together to ensure that the knowledge and understanding of scientific concepts are kept as up to date as possible
- This comes from continuous experimenting based on evolving knowledge and new developments in technology
- For example, one of the early models of the atom was the 'plum pudding model' by JJ Thompson
- Emerging evidence later found by Ernest Rutherford established that most of the atom was actually empty space
- This lead to an evolved understanding of what the atom looks like, which is still being investigated to this day
- Scientists ask questions, suggest answers (hypothesise) then test these suggestions
- This is known as the scientific process
The Scientific Process
- Ask a question about why something happens or how it works e.g. why does light diffract?
- Suggest an answer by forming a theory (a possible explanation of the observation) e.g. light is a wave
- This could also be in the form of a model or a simplified picture of what is physically going on e.g. the spreading out of waves
- Make a prediction or hypothesis
- This is a testable statement, based on the theory, about what will happen if it is tested
- For example, if light is a wave, it is expected to reflect and refract
- Carry out an experiment to test the hypothesis
- This will provide clear evidence to support the initial prediction
- For example, investigating the reflection and refraction of light - if the experiment doesn't match the theory, the theory must change
Validating Scientific Knowledge
- A theory is only scientific if it can be tested
- Any pieces of experiment evidence must be published
- This is often in scientific journals and reports (papers)
- The papers are peer-reviewed by the scientific community in the same field
- Other scientists examine the data and results, ensuring that there has been a fair test and the conclusion from the results is reasonable
- This also ensures that work published in journals is of a good standard
- This process helps validate scientific knowledge and ensure integrity (trustworthiness)
- Scientists can be dishonest or biased, leading to invalid conclusions from their experiments
- For example, manipulating the data to fit with their hypothesis
- Peer-review isn't perfect, and often independent scientists test the theory themselves to cross-check the results and make sure the original results weren't just a 'fluke'
- If the evidence then supports a theory, the theory is accepted (for now)
- If many experiments back this theory with good evidence, and it is not yet deemed incorrect, then the theory is considered a scientific 'fact'
- However, scientific theories are never indisputable
- There can be breakthroughs and advances to provide new ways to test the theory which could lead to new evidence and conflicts
- When this happens, the testing happens all over again, the theory is adapted to the new evidence found
- The best theories are those that scientists are continuously trying to poke holes in and test thoroughly. If the theories survive many different tests, then it is more trusted
- The nature of scientific knowledge is therefore continuously changing and evolving
