Michael is an IG2 chemistry student. He has to his disposal, in the chemistry lab, the chemicals sodium chloride, in both chip and powdered form, and hydrochloric acid. Michael decides to mix the two substances by pouring the hydrochloric acid on the sodium hydroxide in both states chip and powder form. Michael does not have an aim or reason for doing this so his intentions are unknown. Michael gives a possible outcome or hypothesis that as soon as the hydrochloric acid is added the chips of sodium chloride would react instantaneously and quick because of its large size. He also hypothesized that the powdered sodium chloride would react slowly because of its tiny particles which react. From this Michael concludes that large substances dissolve
…show more content…
However scientists have created a body of techniques for investigating phenomena, acquiring new knowledge, or correcting and integrating previous knowledge known as the scientific method. The scientific method provides a systematic and chronological method for solving a situation. In this case if Michael had considered using the scientific method he would have had an aim which he could work towards. Michael would have also been able to hypothesize on a possible outcome before concluding. He could observe the chemical substances to gain some qualitative data before conducting the experiment for some quantitative data in order to give an accurate and concrete …show more content…
Other researchers can repeat the experiment to try and validate or disprove the method in order to modify the predictions results and tests to create consistency in the data which ay lead to it being passed as a theory later. A clear example of this can be from the knowledge on atomic theory which was just a hypothesis by Democritus of substances being made of tiny particles which was built on by people like John Dalton who came up with his plump pudding model and from Ernest Rutherford's replication of John Dalton's theory in an attempt to validate it ended up disproving it which lead to his discovery of the electron which aided in building upon the atomic theory to make it what it is
However scientists have created a body of techniques for investigating phenomena, acquiring new knowledge, or correcting and integrating previous knowledge known as the scientific method. The scientific method provides a systematic and chronological method for solving a situation. In this case if Michael had considered using the scientific method he would have had an aim which he could work towards. Michael would have also been able to hypothesize on a possible outcome before concluding. He could observe the chemical substances to gain some qualitative data before conducting the experiment for some quantitative data in order to give an accurate and concrete …show more content…
Other researchers can repeat the experiment to try and validate or disprove the method in order to modify the predictions results and tests to create consistency in the data which ay lead to it being passed as a theory later. A clear example of this can be from the knowledge on atomic theory which was just a hypothesis by Democritus of substances being made of tiny particles which was built on by people like John Dalton who came up with his plump pudding model and from Ernest Rutherford's replication of John Dalton's theory in an attempt to validate it ended up disproving it which lead to his discovery of the electron which aided in building upon the atomic theory to make it what it is