2006-06-28 05:08:02 · 14 answers · asked by Anonymous in Science & Mathematics ➔ Other - Science
This is not an abstract question and you have to consider it if you are an experimentalist in science and you have to design, analyze, or explain an experiment.
2006-07-03 08:08:52 · update #1
The two best answers to my Q is a tie between the A's from ray g and davehuckleberry. Forced to chose ,the winner is:
2006-07-10 05:25:55 · update #2
The failures really shouldn't be looked at as failing. In science you have a question, then you make a hypothesis and try to answer, when you do the experiment and it comes out negative you have eliminated a possibility and now you are one step closer to the answer. A lot of answeres in science are discovered through a failed experiment.
2006-06-28 05:12:55 · answer #1 · answered by ray g 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
This is a simple question if brought to a integrated system scope.
The current methodologies of science seek a series of specific scientific endeavors and outcomes with a set focus. There are countless ways to do something wrong, but to get the "successful" results you're looking for, very few ways exist, and perhaps only one.
The question should not be so "failures to success" because scientifically speaking, unless you are experimenting to develop or achieve a goal, there are no wrong answers, and no failures.
2006-07-09 11:24:08 · answer #2 · answered by savage_insight 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Same reason why your keys are in the last place you search for them, why would you keep looking once you found them. Once an experiment has become successful, is not the real challenge to move on to the next one. Why keep repeating the same old one?
b
2006-06-28 12:13:29 · answer #3 · answered by Bacchus 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Nature does not have failure and success. There are only events. Failure and success are subjective notions. In science
we mathematize the events we are interested in which are what
we call success and since we are interested in only a limited
percentage of events it appears that failure is more frequent.
It comes down to a matter of language, not nature.
2006-06-28 12:32:34 · answer #4 · answered by albert 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
experiments are ideas. nobleloriate and inventor Linus Pauling was once asked how he could have so many good ideas. he replied," it's simple - i have a lot of ideas and i through out the bad ones". experiments that yield negative results are recorded just as diligently as those with positive results. they may prove valuable in saving time and money to someone else, and in corrporate research it's all about the money.
2006-06-28 12:25:51 · answer #5 · answered by pacman 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
In science you will make 1000's of scientific failures just to make that one successful one. And it is often a failed experiment that leads one to new discoveries.
2006-07-07 02:34:12 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because once an experiment is successfull, it is no longer done, or if it is, it is called a demonstration, not an experiment. The word experiment means you don't know for sure that it will work, so many don't.
2006-06-28 15:49:05 · answer #7 · answered by campbelp2002 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The failures imply show ways that the experiment cannot work.
2006-06-28 12:17:33 · answer #8 · answered by J_humor 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
well if it succeeded all the time we'd get cocky. actually it takes a lot to pull off experiments and failure is normal and a learning experience. what we learn from failures spurn us on and make us better scientists.
2006-06-28 13:53:48 · answer #9 · answered by shiara_blade 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
One must fail to succeed. You must learn as much about something as possible. The only way to learn that is to screw it up.
2006-06-28 12:11:17 · answer #10 · answered by WDubsW 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋