Recent developments in science are built upon previous findings. This is how most scientific theories are started! Starting with what we know works, adding onto it, testing out of bounds to see if it works or not, and either proving its effectiveness or disproving it!
Research that goes beyond this initial framework is called extrapolation. Extrapolating means going outside of what has been proven before so that you can make assumptions about why something seems to work for people in certain situations.
For example, when someone says “this cream helps your skin get better faster” then they are doing an experiment by applying the product and watching the result. If their skin looks good and becomes more beautiful due to using the product then they have proved that the products effective.
However, if instead of seeing results they only saw scars and hurt, then they would not recommend the product because it did not work for them. Therefore, they ruled out one part of the hypothesis – that the product helped improve skin conditions– and put forward another theory that explained the effects they observed.
This is where extrapolation comes into play. Because they assumed that the product improved skin condition even though there were no changes, they proposed that the product must help keep cells alive. In those cases, when there are no visible changes, the body uses the product to stay alive and therefore believes it to be helpful.
History of science
The term “science” comes from the Latin word for knowledge or study. In ancient Greece, people gathered around fires to discuss ideas and share what they knew. Some used logic to prove theories and claim credit for discoveries, but these concepts didn’t have any rules or formal guidelines to ensure that their results were accurate.
Aristotle was one of the first scientists because he established procedures for investigating claims. He focused on two qualities in potential scientific hypotheses — consistency and reproducibility (ability to be done by others) —and assigned value to the second more than the first.
His reasoning? If something works once, then it must work again. So if you test your hypothesis by doing the opposite of what is supposed to happen, then you can use the result to determine whether the original idea is wrong.
This process, which we now call experimentation, became important as humans learned how nature worked. By studying plants and animals, Aristotle realized that some behaviors repeated themselves. For example, sharks are hungry most of the time so they keep eating meat until they are full.
By applying his theory to human beings, Aristotle concluded that hunger was an instinctive need like thirst or breathing. To make sure this concept was true, he fed himself only when there was no food available and slept without sleep to see if he was still hungry the next day.
The scientific method
The term “scientific” is used very loosely these days. There are many things that call themselves science, but the true definition of the word is quite specific. The process we refer to as the scientific method was originally coined in the 17th century by Sir Isaac Newton. He defined it in his book Philosophiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica (Latin for Mathematical Principles of Philosophy).
Newton described the scientific method as a framework for generating knowledge about nature and the universe. It includes six steps: observation, reasoning using logic, experimentation, analysis, conclusion and revision.
This review process can be repeated multiple times until you reach a stable result. Only at this stage does the work become considered research.
Assumptions of science
In doing scientific research, there are always assumptions being made. These assumptions come from past experiences or generalizations about how things work. For example, when scientists do experiments to determine the best way to mix certain materials, they make an assumption about the temperature of the mixture.
The scientist assumes that the liquid will not change state until it is cooled down so they usually cool the container before adding the other material. When making these assumptions, they must be sure that the experiment has no effects due to this alteration in the fluid.
Another common assumption in science is called the “Null Hypothesis”. This hypothesis says that nothing happened, therefore we can rule out chance as a cause for what happened in the experiment. For instance, if we test whether boiling water changes the density of sugar, then we assume that it does not- thus ruling out chance as a factor.
However, because we know that water becomes more dense at higher temperatures, we cannot conclude anything about whether or not sugar densifies according to our null hypothesis. We have to create another assumption!
We say that since nothing changed the density of the sugar after heating it, then the difference before and after must be caused by something else. Therefore, we assume that the increase in density was caused by the steam produced during the boiling process.
By creating our own assumption, we were able to prove our original theory wrong! Scientists use this method to prove theories about everything from chemicals to people.
Evidence of science
Writing scientific papers is not easy. There are many steps involved in publishing an article, so there is no way that just anyone can do it. Even having a passion for science cannot always guarantee you will be successful.
However, what most scientists share in common is a few fundamental things. They all agree on evidence, experimentation, hypothesis, theory, and conclusion. These components make up the process we use to learn about nature and how to fix or improve upon it.
This guide will go into more detail on these concepts and describe some basic strategies used to write scientific research articles. Hopefully you will then have enough knowledge to start writing your own!
A key part of learning anything new is knowing what has worked before. This process is called inductive reasoning or empirical study. When you apply this concept to science, you get the term “evidence-based studies” or EBS.
We look at past experiments and see if they work or fail. If they succeed, we confirm the original hypothesis and add to our understanding of nature, and if they fail, we develop newer theories based on what changes made them ineffective.
There are several reasons why past experiments may not fully work. The researchers could have done something wrong, the results could be due to chance, or the experiment was too limited. All of these would prevent the paper from being published and leaving the reader with false conclusions.
Conclusion of science
So, what is scientific research based on? Simply put, it’s the testable theory that explains how and why things work in our universe. This theory has been validated through repeated testing over time, and with different materials and conditions.
When we say “testable,” we mean capable of being verified or falsified by an experiment or observation. For example, when physicists perform experiments to determine the strength of steel, they are looking to see whether steel breaks under stress. If it does not break, then they will conclude that the steel is strong.
By contrast, if you try to pull apart thin metal sheets using your hands, it can easily snap because there is no solid mass to support the force. The sheets will usually bend but never fully resist separation, making it difficult to assess their true strength.
Similarly, when scientists study how light interacts with matter, they look for reflections and refractions, as well as changes in color. When they do not find these effects, then they can assume that light won’t interact with the material under investigation.
We also need to consider the context in which something happens. Does the phenomenon occur only under special conditions, like very hot or cold objects? Or does it happen even when the environment is calm? These differences suggest that the effect is unlikely to be important in most cases.
Definition of research
Define research as investigating or studying topics or material that are related to past studies, current practices, and/or experimental procedures.
Based on the definition above, what is scientific research not? Investigating things that have never been studied before! This contradicts the definition in the bullet point above because it says “related” to other studies, practices, and experiments.
In fact, there are several examples of this type of research in existence. For instance, many people have done clinical trials on whether or not eating chocolate helps reduce stress. Others have conducted surveys to see if doing yoga makes you feel happier. Both of these types of research fall under the category of medical science since they relate to health and wellness.
But neither of those two examples fit the definition of scientific research according to the Federal Register. Because they have never been done before, they do not meet the first part of the definition which states that research must be an investigation or study of something else.
History of research
Many aspects of our daily lives are influenced by past investigations and studies. Technology would be impossible to implement without careful consideration and experimentation of how things work. For example, smartphone technology is heavily reliant on physics and electronics.
As we know, when you drop an item it breaks into two pieces. In fact, this happens at such a fast speed that most people cannot even see it happen! This is because the materials used to make something like a phone are very strong.
That’s why they use what’s called solid state components–the parts don’t break down but instead flow out due to internal forces. By using these types of components, engineers have found ways to create bigger, thinner smartphones with lots of features.
The scientific method
The term “scientific” comes from the Latin word scientia, which means knowledge or understanding. So, scientifically speaking, we can say that research is an organized process to gather facts using rigorous procedures to ensure that results are valid.
The way this process works is by asking questions and exploring answers in accordance with certain rules. These rules include having adequate resources for testing your hypotheses, recording observations and data systematically, and reproducing findings like a scientist would do.
When done properly, the conclusions you reach will be true, reliable, and validated. This doesn’t mean they’re always correct, but at least you’ll know how to identify them!
And while there’s no one right way to do science, the organization of the process described here has been proven to work well. It was first developed over two thousand years ago and has been adapted, improved, and extended many times since then. That makes it one of the most successful planning strategies ever devised.