Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
The Scientific Method!
2 views
Skip to first unread message
The Starmaker
Jun 19, 2013, 12:51:33 PM6/19/13
to
I. The scientific method has four steps
1. Observation and description of a phenomenon or group of phenomena.
2. Formulation of an hypothesis to explain the phenomena. In physics, the hypothesis often takes the form of a causal mechanism or a mathematical relation.
3. Use of the hypothesis to predict the existence of other phenomena, or to predict quantitatively the results of new observations.
4. Performance of experimental tests of the predictions by several independent experimenters and properly performed experiments.
systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses....
or letting reality speak for itself.
Lets give this bird The Nobel Prize for inventing The Scientific Method!
http://www.youtube.com/v/BGPGknpq3e0
The Starmaker
Don't let anyone 'con you' into thinking the 'scientific community' invented The Scientific Method.
Give them a couple of years and they'll take the credit for inventing the Moon!
1. Observation and description of a phenomenon or group of phenomena.
2. Formulation of an hypothesis to explain the phenomena. In physics, the hypothesis often takes the form of a causal mechanism or a mathematical relation.
3. Use of the hypothesis to predict the existence of other phenomena, or to predict quantitatively the results of new observations.
4. Performance of experimental tests of the predictions by several independent experimenters and properly performed experiments.
systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses....
or letting reality speak for itself.
Lets give this bird The Nobel Prize for inventing The Scientific Method!
http://www.youtube.com/v/BGPGknpq3e0
The Starmaker
Don't let anyone 'con you' into thinking the 'scientific community' invented The Scientific Method.
Give them a couple of years and they'll take the credit for inventing the Moon!
Koobee Wublee
Jun 19, 2013, 1:07:01 PM6/19/13
to
Why this is marked as abuse? It has been marked as abuse.
Report not abuse
On Jun 19, 9:51 am, The Starmaker wrote:
> I. The scientific method has four steps
>
> 1. Observation and description of a phenomenon or group of
> phenomena.
>
> 2. Formulation of an hypothesis to explain the phenomena. In
> physics, the hypothesis often takes the form of a causal
> mechanism or a mathematical relation.
>
> 3. Use of the hypothesis to predict the existence of other
> phenomena, or to predict quantitatively the results of new
> observations.
>
> 4. Performance of experimental tests of the predictions by
> several independent experimenters and properly performed
> experiments.
>
> systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the
> formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses....
> or letting reality speak for itself.
But self-styled physicists do not understand scientific method.
> I. The scientific method has four steps
>
> 1. Observation and description of a phenomenon or group of
> phenomena.
>
> 2. Formulation of an hypothesis to explain the phenomena. In
> physics, the hypothesis often takes the form of a causal
> mechanism or a mathematical relation.
>
> 3. Use of the hypothesis to predict the existence of other
> phenomena, or to predict quantitatively the results of new
> observations.
>
> 4. Performance of experimental tests of the predictions by
> several independent experimenters and properly performed
> experiments.
>
> systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the
> formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses....
> or letting reality speak for itself.
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics.relativity/msg/176f0a67101330ad
Ubiquitous
Jun 19, 2013, 4:00:11 PM6/19/13
to
In article <51C1E1...@ix.netcom.com>, star...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
>I. The scientific method has four steps
And you posted this off-topic article here because?
>I. The scientific method has four steps
--
"We're gonna punish our enemies and we're gonna reward our friends"
-- Barack "Dear Ruler" Obama
benj
Jun 19, 2013, 11:27:16 PM6/19/13
to
On Wed, 19 Jun 2013 16:00:11 -0400, Ubiquitous wrote:
> In article <51C1E1...@ix.netcom.com>, star...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
>
>>I. The scientific method has four steps
>
> And you posted this off-topic article here because?
Because so-called "Starmaker" is a media moron.
> In article <51C1E1...@ix.netcom.com>, star...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
>
>>I. The scientific method has four steps
>
> And you posted this off-topic article here because?
The Starmaker
Jun 20, 2013, 12:39:15 PM6/20/13
to
Lance Porter wrote:
>
> The Starmaker wrote:
>
> [snip crap]
Okay Lance, you seem to have differculty with 'The Scienticif Method'...
I'll explain in bird talk...
First the bird in the video computes to see what would happen;
Then the bird compares the result of the computation to nature, with experiment and experience,
the bird in the video compares it directly with his observation, to see if it works.
If it disagrees with the birds experiment, the bird knows it does not work.
>
> The Starmaker wrote:
>
> [snip crap]
>
> > systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the
> > formulation,
> > testing, and modification of hypotheses....
> > or letting reality speak for itself.
>
> This is model evaluation and constraints. Learn something.
> > systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the
> > formulation,
> > testing, and modification of hypotheses....
> > or letting reality speak for itself.
>
Okay Lance, you seem to have differculty with 'The Scienticif Method'...
I'll explain in bird talk...
First the bird in the video computes to see what would happen;
Then the bird compares the result of the computation to nature, with experiment and experience,
the bird in the video compares it directly with his observation, to see if it works.
If it disagrees with the birds experiment, the bird knows it does not work.
Koobee Wublee
Jun 20, 2013, 12:47:20 PM6/20/13
to
On Jun 20, 9:39 am, The Starmaker <starma...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
themselves scientists, and yet they do not understand what scientific
method is. <shrug>
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics.relativity/msg/176f0a67101330ad
What else is new? <shrug>
> Lance Porter wrote:
> > This is model evaluation and constraints. Learn something.
>
> Okay Lance, you seem to have differculty with 'The Scienticif Method'...
>
> I'll explain in bird talk...
>
> First the bird in the video computes to see what would happen;
> Then the bird compares the result of the computation to nature,
> with experiment and experience, the bird in the video compares
> it directly with his observation, to see if it works. If it
> disagrees with the birds experiment, the bird knows it does not
> work.
>
> Lets give this bird The Nobel Prize for inventing The Scientific
> Method!
> http://www.youtube.com/v/BGPGknpq3e0
So, the birds are smarter than the self-styled physicists who call
> > This is model evaluation and constraints. Learn something.
>
> Okay Lance, you seem to have differculty with 'The Scienticif Method'...
>
> I'll explain in bird talk...
>
> First the bird in the video computes to see what would happen;
> Then the bird compares the result of the computation to nature,
> with experiment and experience, the bird in the video compares
> it directly with his observation, to see if it works. If it
> disagrees with the birds experiment, the bird knows it does not
> work.
>
> Lets give this bird The Nobel Prize for inventing The Scientific
> Method!
> http://www.youtube.com/v/BGPGknpq3e0
themselves scientists, and yet they do not understand what scientific
method is. <shrug>
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics.relativity/msg/176f0a67101330ad
What else is new? <shrug>
J. Clarke
Jun 20, 2013, 2:36:09 PM6/20/13
to
In article <e35f76ce-f893-4171-b18f-038516a04747
@bn1g2000pbb.googlegroups.com>, koobee...@gmail.com says...
Looneewublee, the only way you will "disprove" _special_ relativity is
by disproving _general_ relativity, as _special_ relativity is called
"special" because it is a special case derivable from _general_
relativiy.
Trying to attack it by any other means than that or conflict with
experiments is a waste of your time and everyone else's.
@bn1g2000pbb.googlegroups.com>, koobee...@gmail.com says...
by disproving _general_ relativity, as _special_ relativity is called
"special" because it is a special case derivable from _general_
relativiy.
Trying to attack it by any other means than that or conflict with
experiments is a waste of your time and everyone else's.
hanson
Jun 20, 2013, 5:25:51 PM6/20/13
to
ahahahaha... AHAHAHAHAHA... ahahahahaha....
Einstein Dingleberry "J. Clarke" <jclark...@cox.net>
worships Albert's Sphincter as is seen in his religious
yearning below. Thanks for the laughs, you Dreidel.
Einstein Dingleberry "J. Clarke" <jclark...@cox.net>
worships Albert's Sphincter as is seen in his religious
yearning below. Thanks for the laughs, you Dreidel.
>
>
koobee...@gmail.com says...
>>
>> On Jun 20, 9:39 am, The Starmaker <starma...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>> > Lance Porter wrote:
>>
>> > > This is model evaluation and constraints. Learn something.
>> >
>> > Okay Lance, you seem to have differculty with 'The Scienticif
>> > Method'...
>> >
>> > I'll explain in bird talk...
>> >
>> > First the bird in the video computes to see what would happen;
>> > Then the bird compares the result of the computation to nature,
>> > with experiment and experience, the bird in the video compares
>> > it directly with his observation, to see if it works. If it
>> > disagrees with the birds experiment, the bird knows it does not
>> > work.
>> >
>> > Lets give this bird The Nobel Prize for inventing The Scientific
>> > Method!
>> > http://www.youtube.com/v/BGPGknpq3e0
>>
>> So, the birds are smarter than the self-styled physicists who call
>> themselves scientists, and yet they do not understand what scientific
>> method is. <shrug>
>>
>> http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics.relativity/msg/176f0a67101330ad
>>
>> What else is new? <shrug>
>
>
koobee...@gmail.com says...
>>
>> On Jun 20, 9:39 am, The Starmaker <starma...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>> > Lance Porter wrote:
>>
>> > > This is model evaluation and constraints. Learn something.
>> >
>> > Okay Lance, you seem to have differculty with 'The Scienticif
>> > Method'...
>> >
>> > I'll explain in bird talk...
>> >
>> > First the bird in the video computes to see what would happen;
>> > Then the bird compares the result of the computation to nature,
>> > with experiment and experience, the bird in the video compares
>> > it directly with his observation, to see if it works. If it
>> > disagrees with the birds experiment, the bird knows it does not
>> > work.
>> >
>> > Lets give this bird The Nobel Prize for inventing The Scientific
>> > Method!
>> > http://www.youtube.com/v/BGPGknpq3e0
>>
>> So, the birds are smarter than the self-styled physicists who call
>> themselves scientists, and yet they do not understand what scientific
>> method is. <shrug>
>>
>> http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics.relativity/msg/176f0a67101330ad
>>
>> What else is new? <shrug>
>
0 new messages