scientist
-the hypothesis is accepted anyways
-the experiment is considered inaccurate and another experiment is designed to test the hypothesis
-the hypothesis is rejected & the scientist will develop & test an alternative hypothesis
2007-03-08 19:51:21 · 8 answers · asked by lore 1 in Environment
It depends entirely on the integrity of the scientist. Most will favor option 2, except in the areas of environment and ecology, where option 1 is favored, and the data is massaged to make it fit the theory.
2007-03-08 20:15:23 · answer #1 · answered by Helmut 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
well they could always call in the mythbusters! an experiment is never inaccurate. the results may not varify the hypothesis but it doesnt mean it was a failure it just means they proved that its not how to do it. much can be learned from experiments that go wrong such as how to gain better control, which variants need to be maintained or removed and the number of times it is conducted. the best thing would be to rethink the same hypothesis and design a better way to test it.
2007-03-08 20:13:45 · answer #2 · answered by jamie28981 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If the experiment was conducted with care (and if doubt starts arising just because it did not suit the hypothesis, that is not scientific), and enough times to rule out chance outliers, the hypothesis must be rejected or revised and the new hypothesis needs to be confirmed. The cycle goes on.
2007-03-08 20:27:51 · answer #3 · answered by Swamy 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
the hypothesis is rejected & the scientist will develop & test an alternative hypothesis
2007-03-08 20:16:05 · answer #4 · answered by fidan a 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The hypothesis is rejected. You must develop another hypothesis and begin testing from there.
2007-03-08 19:55:47 · answer #5 · answered by Mystery Viscera 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Hypothesis are basically what they are; probabilities. They are guides to answers and are meant to be accepted or rejected.
If the tests supports the hypothesis, it becomes an acceptable theory/law, otherwise, it is rejected.
As it is either way, it has served its purpose.
2007-03-08 20:18:36 · answer #6 · answered by comradechris 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If the problem is significant, the hot information will be revealed in a peer-reviewed medical mag. that is truly established even as coping with subject matters on the reducing fringe of technology. my personal doctoral dissertation became revealed, and it refuted before medical papers the position the experiments were no longer as huge as were mine.
2016-12-05 11:04:06 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
keep experimenting, but keep in mind what your experimenting for,
2007-03-08 19:59:04 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋