THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD Science is a systematic process in which observation of the natural world leads to questions, and possible

answers to such questions are proposed and tested. This process of questioning and investigation is known as the scientific method. The steps in the scientific method are as follows: 1) Observe. The process begins with the observation of some phenomenon in the natural world. Observations must be occurrences that we can see, feel, hear, touch, smell, or measure using scientific tools (like telescopes or microscopes). Anything that cannot be directly observed in this way is outside of the realm of science. 2) Formulate a question. This is the step that logically follows an observation that cannot be readily explained. It usually takes the form, I wonder if.?, or Could it be because.? 3) Research the known facts. Often, it is not necessary to start at square one when investigating a problem. Some questions that result from observations will have been investigated many times before, and you can use that information to answer your question, or help focus your next step in this process. 4) State a hypothesis. (Or, even better, multiple working hypotheses.) A hypothesis is a tentative, testable statement relevant to answering the question you have asked about the phenomenon you observed. The key part of this definition is testable. If a hypothesis cannot be tested, it is not scientifically useful, no matter how interesting it might seem. 5) Test the hypothesis. This step involves the development of observations, experiments, and models to test whether or not the hypothesis correctly explains all observed cases, and can be used to correctly predict future outcomes. An important feature of such testing is that it must be repeatable, not just by the original experimenter, but by others. Hypotheses are usually tested many times. 6) Accept, modify, or reject the hypothesis. Many hypotheses are correct, and many are wrong. Not supporting a hypothesis is not a scientific failure. Even hypotheses that are initially accepted must often later be modified, or even totally rejected, when new observations come to light. It is only after extensive testing that a hypothesis is elevated to the next level. A hypothesis that has undergone extensive, rigorous testing may be advanced to the status of a theory, a statement or relationship that is accepted by most scientists. Examples would be the theories of evolution and plate tectonics. It is a common misconception on the part of non-scientists that the word theory implies a highly speculative, tentative concept (i.e., just a guess). On the contrary, a hypothesis only becomes a theory after years of testing and verification. The highest status a scientific principle can achieve is a law. Laws are principles explaining events in nature that have been observed to occur with unvarying consistency. Examples would be the laws of motion and thermodynamics in physics. Does science ever arrive at the undisputed truth? Any scientist who makes such a claim about a scientific statement should be considered misguided. Absolute truth is not a reachable goal in science, because we can never be sure that we have acquired and fully examined all available

data. No rational scientist will ever claim that he or she has enough data and needs no more. It is even possible that well-accepted theories and laws may be superseded by new observations that are not yet available. This should not, however, be looked upon as a weakness of science. Instead, it is a great validation of the strength of the scientific method. Many of the greatest scientific advancements in history have been the result of new observations that caused a previously accepted hypothesis to be rejected. The following exercises will acquaint you further with the scientific method.

Name: ______________________________Due at the start of lecture one week from today Part 1 Harold and the Orange Lake The following exercise is designed to give you some practice in determining what are appropriate scientific questions to ask and proper hypotheses to propose when faced with a problem in the natural world. Heres the situation. On his way back to campus, driving across the I-90 bridge from Seattle, Harold comes out of the tunnel and suddenly notices that Lake Washington has turned bright orange. Several thoughts run through his mind. Some of these thoughts may be valid steps in initiating the scientific method to solve this mystery, and some may not. Each may be classified as one of the following: a. An irrelevant observation (has no bearing on the problem) b. A valid observation c. An irrelevant question (has no bearing on the problem) d. A valid question e. An improper hypothesis (untestable) f. A valid hypothesis (testable) 1) For each of the following thoughts that runs through Harolds mind, specify (in the blank) which of the above (a-f) best describes the statement. _______ Hey, the lake is orange! _______ I like orange juice. _______ Nothing else looks unusual, just the lake. _______ I dont smell anything unusual. _______ What made the lake turn orange? _______ Will Maude sit next to me in math class today? _______ When did the lake turn orange? _______ Is the water warmer or colder than usual? _______ Aliens must have turned the lake orange using some kind of color laser beam. _______ There must be some form pollution that has turned the lake orange. 2) If you determined that any of the above were scientifically improper hypotheses, explain why you thought so.

3) Is it possible for a hypothesis to be judged as a scientifically improper hypothesis, yet turn out to be ultimately true? Why or why not?

Part 2 Plants and Salt (a little more realistic scenario) In this part, you will be given the initial observations, and asked to propose a question, hypothesis, and experimental design to address the problem. Heres the situation: On a walk down to the beach, you observe that the plants change as you get closer to the ocean and finally no plants grow when you get to the beach itself. You also observe that there are salt crystals in the soil close to the beach, but not farther away from it. 1. Formulate a valid question based on the observations listed above.

2. State a proper scientific hypothesis based on your observations and the question you asked above. Remember that it must be testable.

3. Propose an experiment that would test your hypothesis. What sort of data would you collect, and how would you analyze it? Would you gather data in the field, or would you conduct a laboratory experiment, or both? Why? Remember that a valid experiment should be free from any bias (should not be set up to favor any particular outcome). Also such an experiment must be repeatable (by you and by others).