Board index › Topical Discussion › Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

Can you make assumptions in science?

Page 18 of 18 [ 284 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 14, 15, 16, 17, 18

Previous topic | Next topic

aghogday
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Nov 2010
Age: 63
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,599

10 Feb 2015, 9:24 am

eric76 wrote:
aghogday wrote:
eric76 wrote:
aghogday wrote:
eric76 wrote:
aghogday wrote:
A hypothesis and a frigging hypothetical AND an assumption are ALL SYNONYMS.


You are seriously missing a very important point -- the language as used in science is, by necessity, more precise than that used by non-scientists. What science doesn't need is for people to start playing word games based on the ambiguity of human languages.

If you use 'hypothesis' and 'assumption' as synonyms in science, you will be thought of as being some kind of village idiot with no credibility whatsoever. After all, if you have no comprehension of the most basic terms in science, then who would expect you to be able to get something more complicated at all correct?


Dude we are not talking about proper language for a research paper here, we are talking about semantics and definitions of words.

It is perfectly acceptable to talk about assumptions as synonyms for hypotheticals in science, in a casual conversation OR ON THE INTERWEBZ.

I was a technical writer for the government in my many hats there, and in red tape land, the restrictions when actually writing documents is much different than discussing them informally.

Additionally, I was employed as a research associate in my younger years, and I am more than familiar with the ins and outs of scientific research as I actually did it for pay.

We all SHOULD know assumptions in science are hypotheticals, at least in common sense language, and that IS PRECISELY WHAT THE MERIAM-WEBSTER DICTIONARY SPEAKS TO, COMMON SENSE, not rigid black and white thinking, as the English Language DOES NOT work like that, as it is ALL METAPHOR AT CORE.

SO in other words, lighten up, and enjoy science if you can and will, without worrying about all the P's and Q's, dotted i's and crossed t's, as that is not the concern of lay people here, unless they want it to be, and that's okay too.

But never the less, the Merriam-Webster dictionary has this common sense issue, already resolved, for black and white thinkers, if they can move outside the box of thinking, per P's and Q's, dotted i's and crossed t's. :)


You cannot intelligently discuss science if you don't even understand the language.


Oh please dude, don't try the insulting the intelligence thingy with me.

I am more than educated well, with three degrees in science and art.

Top of the class dude, and I have the documentation to prove it.

It takes more than just jargon to understand science.

And any REAL SCIENTIST can tell you that. :)


We're not talking about jargon. We are talking about definitions of some of the most basic terms common to all sciences. I have never come across any situation in science where the terms 'hypothesis' and 'assumption' are interchangeable.

Perhaps you know of an example in science where they are interchangeable. If so, please enlighten us.

You need to understand that synonyms do not mean that the words are equivalent -- only that each has one or more definitions that are sufficiently similar to each other.

For example, 'shut' and 'close' are synonyms. You could say "shut the door" or "close the door" and be equally correct. However, if you were to say "I am shut to the solution to this problem" instead of "I am close to the solution to this problem", you would leave people scratching their heads wondering what you mean.


Well.. I for one, friend, DO NOT live in a technical systemizing BLACK AND WHITE science WORLD alone...

I LOVE for folks to keep guessing AKA MAKING ASSUMPTIONS AND OR HYPOTHETICALS ABOUT LIFE AS IS.

It CAN expand one's mind, whether it feels all warm and fuzzy or all scienceY or not..;)

Yes, it's the mental masturbation thingy...;)

Synonyms are close enough for the frigging Interwebz...

Or is this a research project...

Maybe it is..;)

BUT THIS 'Einstein' don't play by the rules of SCIENCE school...

EITHER..

and neither does

'she'...;)



Understanding the 'significance' of 'she' is far beyond science at it stands today...;)

And that's where, i for one, AM AT, baby..;)

Einstein style.....

USING IMAGINATION IN SCIENCE AS THE DRIVING FORCE, not the LIMITED FORCE OF SCIENCE AS IS NOW.....

AND THAT BABY.. IS THE QUANTUM MIND UNLEASHED.....


_________________
KATiE MiA FredericK!iI

Gravatar is one of the coolest things ever!! !

http://en.gravatar.com/katiemiafrederick


Grommit
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 7 Mar 2012
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 436

10 Feb 2015, 10:01 am

naturalplastic wrote:
The word "assumption" can be used to mean "making hypotheticals".

But the way scientists use the term its almost the exact opposite of how they use the word "assumption".

The "hypothesis" is the thing being tested. Your "assumptions" are the factors you are NOT testing because you take those factors as given.


Anything taken for granted is an assumption, and a hypothesis is at best a working assumption

Both are similar in nature



naturalplastic
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Aug 2010
Age: 69
Gender: Male
Posts: 34,160
Location: temperate zone

10 Feb 2015, 10:54 am

Grommit wrote:
naturalplastic wrote:
The word "assumption" can be used to mean "making hypotheticals".

But the way scientists use the term its almost the exact opposite of how they use the word "assumption".

The "hypothesis" is the thing being tested. Your "assumptions" are the factors you are NOT testing because you take those factors as given.


Anything taken for granted is an assumption, and a hypothesis is at best a working assumption

Both are similar in nature


Aghogday's response makes sense(admitting that he is speaking in layspeak and not in sciencespeak).


Your response does NOT make ANY sense.

'Assuming' means 'taking something for granted'.

The hypothesis is the thing that you're testing in the experiment.

Therefore the "hypothesis" is the very thing that you're NOT taking for granted. Thats why you are testing it in an experiment.

The two things are opposite in nature.


Like Eric said - in a scientific context- you cant use the two terms interchangeably.
How can something that you're NOT taking for granted be the same thing as something you ARE taking for granted?



eric76
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Aug 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,660
Location: In the heart of the dust bowl

10 Feb 2015, 11:04 am

Grommit wrote:
naturalplastic wrote:
The word "assumption" can be used to mean "making hypotheticals".

But the way scientists use the term its almost the exact opposite of how they use the word "assumption".

The "hypothesis" is the thing being tested. Your "assumptions" are the factors you are NOT testing because you take those factors as given.


Anything taken for granted is an assumption, and a hypothesis is at best a working assumption

Both are similar in nature


naturalplastic has it right. You don't.

A hypothesis is something you want to find out whether or not the evidence backs it up. You are going to do experiments to try to prove the hypothesis. If the evidence does not support the hypothesis, you discard it and go on.

As an example, there is a quite plausible hypothesis that low levels of maternal Vitamin D during pregnancy may result in the developments in the fetus that result in the forthcoming child being Autistic. There is research going on now to test that hypothesis.

See Cannell John Jacob, Autism and vitamin D, Medical Hypotheses, 2008, Volume 70, Issue 4, Pages 750–759.



Grommit
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 7 Mar 2012
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 436

10 Feb 2015, 11:12 am

I'm not disputing anyone's claim,

and if I'm wrong I'm sorry

I was actually agreeing with what aghogday said and natural plastic

I think you will find I am just trying to find a happy medium because my hypothesis says this is crazy, but that's just my observation/assumption, whatever



eric76
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Aug 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,660
Location: In the heart of the dust bowl

10 Feb 2015, 12:29 pm

One place where the language of science really differs from the non-science language is in the word "theory".

Outside of science, the way the word "theory" is used may be indistinguishable from complete nonsense. It is often used for what in science might be called a "conjecture".

In much of science, a "theory" is a former "hypothesis" that has been thoroughly tested with the result of it having overwhelming consistency and support by the available evidence. It is often pretty much indistinguishable from "fact".

Even in science, it is not always used the same thing. In medicine, "theory" may be used in the same manner as "hypothesis" while at other times it is the same as in most science, e.g. "Germ Theory".

In mathematics, "theory" may be thought of as the body of knowledge of a branch of mathematics. For some reason, I have rarely heard the word "hypothesis" used in any of my math classes, but they are certainly there. For example, there is the Riemann Hypothesis. While the Riemann Hypothesis has not been proved, it has been very heavily tested and all of the tests make it seem likely to be true. Because of weight of the mathematical evidence in its favor, it is a "hypothesis" rather than a "conjecture". Note that sometimes a conjecture in mathematics becomes well known (at least by mathematics) by a name that includes the word "conjecture" that it may continue to be called that name even if it becomes a hypothesis.

In physicis, "theory" is usually used as in most science, but sometimes it can used more in the sense of a mathematical theory. One example would be that of String Theory.



Grommit
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 7 Mar 2012
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 436

10 Feb 2015, 1:40 pm

Well done Eric that proves you are not the village idiot!

Good hypothesis but it's still contradicting the very nature of assumption, scientists can hypothesis that I will go on to committing suicide like my parents. But I would rather make the assumption that I won't.

So this states that hypothesis is interchangeable through free will. And if scientists don't like it they can hypothesis about that too. :evil:



aghogday
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Nov 2010
Age: 63
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,599

10 Feb 2015, 2:53 pm

Grommit wrote:
Well done Eric that proves you are not the village idiot!

Good hypothesis but it's still contradicting the very nature of assumption, scientists can hypothesis that I will go on to committing suicide like my parents. But I would rather make the assumption that I won't.

So this states that hypothesis is interchangeable through free will. And if scientists don't like it they can hypothesis about that too. :evil:


So true that science can be an unhealthy source of information, when folks come to believe it as the gospel truth.

My doctors backed up by medical science made it clear there was zero chance for recovery.

The doctors made it clear that there was no drug that could offer me assistance to remediate the synergy of symptoms of 19 medical disorders, including the worst pain known to mankind from waking to sleeping every day for 5 years.

I DECIDED THROUGH human relative free WILL TO CURE MYSELF, AND IT WORKED, SIMPLE AS THAT, in a matter of months and days...

THE QUANTUM MIND BEATS THE HELL OUT OF SCIENCE EVERYDAY FOR THOSE WHO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF IT THROUGH HIGHER POWERS THAN SCIENCE CAN IMAGINE WITHOUT HUMANS who innately and instinctually learn how NOW by looking within.

HUMAN IS THE TRUE POWER, in alignment with the instinctual innate laws of human nature, reflecting the higher power of Nature all around..:)


_________________
KATiE MiA FredericK!iI

Gravatar is one of the coolest things ever!! !

http://en.gravatar.com/katiemiafrederick


Grommit
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 7 Mar 2012
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 436

10 Feb 2015, 3:52 pm

aghogday wrote:
So true that science can be an unhealthy source of information, when folks come to believe it as the gospel truth.

My doctors backed up by medical science made it clear there was zero chance for recovery.

The doctors made it clear that there was no drug that could offer me assistance to remediate the synergy of symptoms of 19 medical disorders, including the worst pain known to mankind from waking to sleeping every day for 5 years.

I DECIDED THROUGH human relative free WILL TO CURE MYSELF, AND IT WORKED, SIMPLE AS THAT, in a matter of months and days...

THE QUANTUM MIND BEATS THE HELL OUT OF SCIENCE EVERYDAY FOR THOSE WHO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF IT THROUGH HIGHER POWERS THAN SCIENCE CAN IMAGINE WITHOUT HUMANS who innately and instinctually learn how NOW by looking within.

HUMAN IS THE TRUE POWER, in alignment with the instinctual innate laws of human nature, reflecting the higher power of Nature all around..:)


This here is pure poetry that resonates. when I read this it gives me hope and inspiration. It's people like this that are constantly breaking the concepts of hypothesis. It's people like this that will evolve human thinking.

Science can be just as corrupt as religion, just look at scientology.

This man right here is 100% all truth and wisdom, as I see it.

This man has the power to combat his inner demons, because he has self faith and self belief.

He has the power to influence others and give you a fighting chance.

He is a force to be reckoned with,
And deserves every respect just like the next person.

If anything these words what aghogday said has more power than any bible could teach or any scientific assumption.

This man is a living legend and is the perfect definition of god. :D

Thanks ahogday for your comments, it's comments like these that tell me there is
Still hope yet.

Peace.



eric76
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Aug 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,660
Location: In the heart of the dust bowl

10 Feb 2015, 3:58 pm

Come to think of it, in Mathematics there is a thing called "proof by contradiction". In it, you assume that the negation of what you are trying to prove is true and show that leads to a contradiction.

For example,

---

Theorem: There is no largest even integer.

Assume that there is a largest even integer and denote it by X. Then since X is an even integer, then X+1 is an odd integer and X+2 is another even integer and it is larger than X. Thus, if X is the largest even integer, there is an even integer larger than X and so X cannot be the largest even integer. Therefore, "there is a largest even integer" is false and thus there is no largest even integer.

---

So if one had a hypothesis in Mathematics, such as the Riemann Hypothesis, one potential way to disprove it might be to assume it's negation is true and then prove that leads to a contradiction which means the negation is false.

In such a case, then, one might actually assume the negation of a hypothesis to show that it leads to a contradiction.



Grommit
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 7 Mar 2012
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 436

10 Feb 2015, 4:14 pm

eric76 wrote:
Come to think of it, in Mathematics there is a thing called "proof by contradiction". In it, you assume that the negation of what you are trying to prove is true and show that leads to a contradiction.

For example,

---

Theorem: There is no largest even integer.

Assume that there is a largest even integer and denote it by X. Then since X is an even integer, then X+1 is an odd integer and X+2 is another even integer and it is larger than X. Thus, if X is the largest even integer, there is an even integer larger than X and so X cannot be the largest even integer. Therefore, "there is a largest even integer" is false and thus there is no largest even integer.

---

So if one had a hypothesis in Mathematics, such as the Riemann Hypothesis, one potential way to disprove it might be to assume it's negation is true and then prove that leads to a contradiction which means the negation is false.

In such a case, then, one might actually assume the negation of a hypothesis to show that it leads to a contradiction.


Everyone is a genius in there own right, it is your birth right. :D

Thanks Eric I will look into this.

Peace.



aghogday
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Nov 2010
Age: 63
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,599

10 Feb 2015, 7:55 pm

Grommit wrote:
aghogday wrote:
So true that science can be an unhealthy source of information, when folks come to believe it as the gospel truth.

My doctors backed up by medical science made it clear there was zero chance for recovery.

The doctors made it clear that there was no drug that could offer me assistance to remediate the synergy of symptoms of 19 medical disorders, including the worst pain known to mankind from waking to sleeping every day for 5 years.

I DECIDED THROUGH human relative free WILL TO CURE MYSELF, AND IT WORKED, SIMPLE AS THAT, in a matter of months and days...

THE QUANTUM MIND BEATS THE HELL OUT OF SCIENCE EVERYDAY FOR THOSE WHO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF IT THROUGH HIGHER POWERS THAN SCIENCE CAN IMAGINE WITHOUT HUMANS who innately and instinctually learn how NOW by looking within.

HUMAN IS THE TRUE POWER, in alignment with the instinctual innate laws of human nature, reflecting the higher power of Nature all around..:)


This here is pure poetry that resonates. when I read this it gives me hope and inspiration. It's people like this that are constantly breaking the concepts of hypothesis. It's people like this that will evolve human thinking.

Science can be just as corrupt as religion, just look at scientology.

This man right here is 100% all truth and wisdom, as I see it.

This man has the power to combat his inner demons, because he has self faith and self belief.

He has the power to influence others and give you a fighting chance.

He is a force to be reckoned with,
And deserves every respect just like the next person.

If anything these words what aghogday said has more power than any bible could teach or any scientific assumption.

This man is a living legend and is the perfect definition of god. :D

Thanks ahogday for your comments, it's comments like these that tell me there is
Still hope yet.

Peace.


And Thank you Grommit for all these kind words of appreciation..:)

Every human is a star.. budding to shine.. in creativity..

If allowed AND allowing.. a shine of life..

By looking within.. and matching light with the stars above..so below..

We all CAN flow.. just by letting the positive light of energy go and glow...:)


_________________
KATiE MiA FredericK!iI

Gravatar is one of the coolest things ever!! !

http://en.gravatar.com/katiemiafrederick