Content deleted Content added
m →top: removed unnecessary }} |
|||
Line 15:
The purpose of an experiment is to determine whether [[observation]]s agree with or conflict with the predictions derived from a hypothesis.<ref name="ReferenceA">Karl R. Popper, ''Conjectures and Refutations: The Growth of Scientific Knowledge'', Routledge, 2003 ISBN 0-415-28594-1</ref> Experiments can take place anywhere from a college lab to CERN's [[Large Hadron Collider]]. There are difficulties in a formulaic statement of method, however. Though the scientific method is often presented as a fixed sequence of steps, it represents rather a set of general principles.<ref>{{cite book |last1= Gauch |first1= Hugh G. |title=Scientific Method in Practice |url=https://books.google.com/?id=iVkugqNG9dAC |edition=Reprint |publisher=Cambridge University Press |date=2003 |page=3 |isbn=9780521017084 |quote=The scientific method 'is often misrepresented as a fixed sequence of steps,' rather than being seen for what it truly is, 'a highly variable and creative process' (AAAS 2000:18). The claim here is that science has general principles that must be mastered to increase productivity and enhance perspective, not that these principles provide a simple and automated sequence of steps to follow.}}</ref>
Not all steps take place in every scientific inquiry (or to the same degree), and are not always in the same order.<ref name="Inductive Science 1837">''History of Inductive Science'' (1837), and in ''Philosophy of Inductive Science'' (1840)</ref> Some philosophers and scientists have argued that there is no scientific method, such as
{{TOC limit|3}}
| |||