Chronology Current Month Current Thread Current Date
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Prev] [Date Next]

Re: [Phys-L] how research is done : exploring a maze using only local information



But is a 'wrong' result recognized as such or is the data/analysis bent to agree with the hypothesis? We here might not call that 'science' but there seem to be plenty of others who would, and thus we end up with climate change nay-sayers, anti-evolution fanatics, even young earth advocates.

rwt

On 9/18/2015 2:05 PM, rjensen@ualberta.ca wrote:
What's wrong with being wrong? You learn from it.

Few scientists would say, "Of these possible pathways, this one is
least likely to work, but I'll take it anyway." And then waste
days/weeks/months proving that it doesn't work. Congrat's on being
right, and on wasting time and money.

You take a path that has a high probability of working. Your
hypothesis is that it will work (whether you use that term or not).
When you find that it doesn't work, you were WRONG. But you learned
that something else occurred, and that in itself may be publishable.
Politicians call it 'spin'. Publish or perish, right?

Dr. Roy Jensen
(==========)-----------------------------------------¤
Lecturer, Chemistry
W5-19, University of Alberta
780.248.1808







--
Richard Tarara
Professor Emeritus
Saint Mary's College

free Physics educational software
www.saintmarys.edu/~rtarara/software.html
NEW: Energy management simulators now available.