{"id":1399,"date":"2016-04-13T15:46:29","date_gmt":"2016-04-13T15:46:29","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/courses.lumenlearning.com\/geologyxwaymakerxmaster\/?post_type=chapter&#038;p=1399"},"modified":"2019-08-28T22:59:23","modified_gmt":"2019-08-28T22:59:23","slug":"scientific-processes-in-geology","status":"publish","type":"chapter","link":"https:\/\/courses.lumenlearning.com\/colorado-wmopen-geology\/chapter\/scientific-processes-in-geology\/","title":{"raw":"Geology As Science","rendered":"Geology As Science"},"content":{"raw":"[video width=\"640\" height=\"480\" mp4=\"https:\/\/s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com\/courses-images\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/2666\/2018\/12\/25234936\/YerMoth-Fall.mp4\"][\/video]\r\n<div><\/div>\r\n<div><\/div>\r\n<div><\/div>\r\n<h2>Scientific Method-- What is it and why bother?<\/h2>\r\nHard rock climbs involve falling. But technology makes these falls pretty safe-- ropes that are strong yet light, expansion bolts that hold multi-thousand pound loads.\r\n\r\nOf course, we live in a world where technology is everywhere-- from contact lenses to smart phones to satellite gps (and radio!) and more.\r\n\r\nAnd, sure sure-- we gotta love science because it gives us all kinds of great medicines and technology. But I think there is more... much more!\r\n\r\nWe use a kind of scientific approach (rational, logical, testable) to all kinds of things-- how we see law, economics, and perhaps even politics!\r\n\r\nFurthermore, science gives us two big ideas... our world and universe are huge, and they are immensely old!\r\n\r\nScientific Process\/Method is not only at the heart of geology and other scientific disciplines, but in many ways a key part of our culture.\r\nIf we think of science as beginning with IDEAS (hypotheses), followed by well substantiated EVIDENCE and TESTING, and eventually UNDERSTANDING (corroborated theory)-- we have to recognize that this way of approaching problems is also at the root of business, economics, law, politics, and almost everything we do!\r\n\r\n(In our culture, we try not to just \"believe\" whatever someone tells us.\u00a0 We \"want the facts\" and we want to understand what those facts imply!)\r\n<div class=\"textbox learning-objectives\">\r\n<h3>What You'll Learn to Do<\/h3>\r\n<ul>\r\n \t<li>View the Scientific Method as a Process<\/li>\r\n \t<li>Recognize the Scientific Method as more than a cookbook set of steps!<\/li>\r\n \t<li>Form a hypothesis and use it to design a scientific experiment.<\/li>\r\n<\/ul>\r\n<\/div>\r\nSometime in your life you've undoubtedly asked questions about the world around you.\u00a0 Perhaps you've wondered why the sky is blue and not some other color; or why we hear an echo across a big canyon; or why we have seasons or lunar phases.\u00a0 Questions about nature are certainly part of doing science, but contrary to some simplified explanations of science, it's much more than just \"asking questions.\"\u00a0 In many ways, good science is all about asking the <em>right<\/em> questions!\u00a0 It's about asking the questions whose answers really tell us more about how the world works.\r\n\r\nAt its essence, doing science involves wondering about how nature works, then coming up with an idea <span style=\"float: none;background-color: transparent;color: #333333;cursor: text;font-family: 'proxima-nova',sans-serif;font-size: 16px;font-style: normal;font-variant: normal;font-weight: 400;letter-spacing: normal;text-align: left;text-decoration: none;text-indent: 0px\">(hypothesis\/theory), and then testing that idea, and re-working the idea till it fits observation, and finally achieving a model that explains certain natural phenomena.<\/span>\r\n\r\n&nbsp;\r\n\r\n<img id=\"image\" src=\"https:\/\/s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com\/courses-images\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/2666\/2016\/04\/04170128\/old-woman.png\" \/>\r\n\r\nEver seen this sketch (by W.E. Hill)??\r\nIt can be seen as an old woman with a big pointed chin--we see her left side in profile.\r\nIt can also be seen as a young woman with dainty nose and a hint of her left eyelash;\u00a0 we see her left side, but her head is mostly turned away from us, as she is turned to the right.\r\n\r\nLike this image, over the last 500 years, scientific revolutions have shown that a reigning perspective on the world is not the only way to see the world.\u00a0 If we look more carefully, it's surprising what may be seen!\r\n\r\n<span style=\"float: none;background-color: transparent;color: #333333;cursor: text;font-family: 'proxima-nova',sans-serif;font-size: 16px;font-style: normal;font-variant: normal;font-weight: 400;letter-spacing: normal;text-align: left;text-decoration: none;text-indent: 0px\">Along these same lines, here is a big idea:\u00a0 Science is NOT \"proving things\" by seeing them happen!\r\nIt's NOT very easy to see sub-atomic particles, or the process of macroscopic organisms undergoing speciation, or 80 mile thick pieces of earth's crust sliding around, but we're pretty confident that we know a lot about these natural processes, and hence we have atomic theory, evolution, and plate tectonics..\r\nIn fact, science often shows us that the world is NOT at all how it looks!<\/span>\r\n<h2>Scientific Method<\/h2>\r\nUgh!\u00a0 You've probably seen this \"flow chart\" ever since elementary school.\r\nIndeed, the scientific method can be thought of as a series of steps that help us to eventually elucidate the way the world works.\r\nAnd, the steps do \"flow\" in a logical and rational manner.\u00a0 The \"doing of science\"-- from wonder to ideas to testing-- is rooted in a logical approach.\r\n\r\nHere is a typical scientific method flow chart.\u00a0 See Figure\u00a01.\r\n\r\n[caption id=\"attachment_1438\" align=\"alignnone\" width=\"474\"]<img class=\"size-full wp-image-1438\" src=\"https:\/\/s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com\/courses-images\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/115\/2016\/04\/14224210\/Fig_2_1.png\" alt=\"Flow chart depicting the scientific method. All steps can go forward and backward as new information is discovered and as understanding increases. 1) Ask a question; 2) Do background research; 3) Construct a hypothesis; 4) Test with an experiment; 5) Construct a hypothesis; 6) The hypothesis is true, partially true, or false; 7) report results. If the hypothesis is false or partially true, think about what happened and try again.\" width=\"474\" height=\"500\" \/> Figure 1. The Scientific Method[\/caption]\r\n<h3>An Example of Scientific Reasoning and Process<\/h3>\r\n[caption id=\"attachment_1443\" align=\"alignright\" width=\"350\"]<img class=\"size-full wp-image-1443\" src=\"https:\/\/s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com\/courses-images\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/115\/2016\/04\/14224830\/Fig_2_2.jpg\" alt=\"A field that has recently been harvested; one portion has sunk down giving way to ground water.\" width=\"350\" height=\"233\" \/> Figure 2. Soil is often lost from ground that has been plowed.[\/caption]\r\n\r\nLet\u2019s say a farmer is having an erosion problem; every year her farm is losing soil. The farmer learns that a farming method called \u201cno-till farming\u201d allows farmers to plant seeds without plowing the land. She wonders if planting seeds without plowing will reduce the erosion problem and help keep more soil on her farmland.\r\n<span style=\"float: none;background-color: transparent;color: #333333;cursor: text;font-family: 'proxima-nova',sans-serif;font-size: 16px;font-style: normal;font-variant: normal;font-weight: 400;letter-spacing: normal;text-align: left;text-decoration: none;text-indent: 0px\">The process might begin with our farmer doing some research (books, journals, other farmers, etc.) as a means to investigate what causes erosion and how avoiding plowing might help. See Figure 2.<\/span>\r\n<h3>Hypothesis<\/h3>\r\nConsider her <b>hypothesis. \u00a0<\/b>\r\n\u201cIf I don\u2019t plow my fields, I will lose less soil than if I do plow the fields. Plowing disrupts the soil and breaks up roots that help hold soil in place.\u00a0 Furthermore, plowing generates flow paths for water that can carry away soil.\u201d\u00a0 A hypothesis is a reasonable explanation that can be tested.\r\n<h3>Experiment\/Testing<\/h3>\r\nWhen we design experiments, it's best to keep things simple. Ideally, during the experiment we only change one aspect of the system--the <strong>independent variable<\/strong>.\r\n\r\nIn this example, the farmer chooses two fields and then changes only one thing between them. She changes how she plows her fields. One field will be tilled and one will not. Everything else (crops, fertilizer, amount of irrigation) will be the same on both fields.\u00a0 These are the experimental <strong>controls<\/strong>.\r\n\r\nThe farmer will measure how much soil is lost from each field. This is the <strong>dependent variable<\/strong>. How much soil is lost from each field \u201cdepends\u201d on the plowing method.\r\n<h3>Data and Experimental Error<\/h3>\r\n[caption id=\"attachment_1445\" align=\"alignright\" width=\"350\"]<img class=\"size-full wp-image-1445\" src=\"https:\/\/s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com\/courses-images\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/115\/2016\/04\/14224943\/Fig_2_4.jpg\" alt=\"Figure 4. A pair of farmers take careful measurements in the field.\" width=\"350\" height=\"490\" \/> Figure 4. A pair of farmers take careful measurements in the field.[\/caption]\r\n\r\nExperimental data involves making measurements using anything from a balance to a ruler to an electron microprobe.\r\nGraphical representation of data is typically useful, comparing independent and dependent variables.\r\n\r\nGood to keep in mind-- With measurement, it's crucial to understand the capability of our observations and devices.\u00a0 For example,when weighing something, if we find a difference of one gram between experimental \"runs\" and the balance is not capable of reproducing measurements better than plus\/minus a gram or so, then that difference is really rather meaningless!\r\n\r\nScientists speak of <strong>precision<\/strong>, in essence meaning how many digits and decimal places we can record from an instrument. For example, I might measure a weight of soil as 2.569473204 grams, which is rather precise!\r\nBut scientists must also consider the likely <strong>accuracy <\/strong>of measurements, in essence how confident we can be with a particular measurement.\u00a0 For example, if my balance can only reproduce to about one half of a gram, then I should really only say that the soil is around 2-3 grams in weight (and not report any decimals)!\r\n<h3>Conclusions<\/h3>\r\nDrawing a conclusion requires evaluating the data and deciding how hypothesis fared.\u00a0 Perhaps the hypothesis requires modification (tweaking) and this should then involve more testing.\r\n\r\nPerhaps after two seasons of crop growth, our farmer finds that 2.2 times as much soil was lost on the plowed field as compared to the un-plowed field. She concludes that her hypothesis was correct. The farmer also notices some other differences in the two plots. The plants in the no-till plots are taller. The soil moisture seems higher. She decides to repeat the experiment. This time she will measure soil moisture, plant growth, and the total amount of water the plants consume. It's a good start, and from now on she will use no-till methods of farming.\r\n<h3>Theory<\/h3>\r\nIn the process of growing up and becoming an adult, there's really no exact point where you can say \"Well, yesterday I was a kid, and today I am a full fledged adult\".\r\nSimilarly, there's no one point where a good hypothesis becomes a full fledged and working theory!\r\n\r\nUltimately, enough scientists evaluate and test a hypothesis, and once it works well to explain the world (whether it's the behavior of atoms, or light, or shifting continents, or \"no-till\" farming!) then it becomes a useful paradigm for interpreting and acquiring additional knowledge.\r\n\r\nIt's worth noting that the assessment of how well a hypothesis works, prior to becoming a theory, is carefully scrutinized by other scientists.\u00a0 This is generally done via the publishing of papers in scientific journals.\u00a0 Important and trustworthy scientific journals are \"peer-reviewed\" meaning that other scientists will look over the work of those who are publishing.\u00a0 The reviewers are experts in the particular field at hand, and they evaluate the quality of the data and the experiments that have been conducted.\u00a0 If there are discrepancies, errors, or faulty reasoning, then the paper is denied publication.\u00a0 It's a bit on the \"rough\" side, but scientists actually take some delight in finding problems with each others work!\u00a0 The good part is that this really makes science quite trustworthy; only very high quality work is allowed to published and become part of the bank of scientific knowledge.\r\n\r\nQuantum theory, relativity theory, organic evolution theory, plate tectonic theory, etc etc etc., are incredibly well-tested theories, via literally tens of thousands of experiments and peer-reviewed scientific papers.\r\nAre these well-established theories 100% correct and true and absolute explanations for the world around us?\u00a0 Definitely not!\u00a0 They are very good, but with time most theories are modified and re-worked.\u00a0 Science is not static; it constantly re-evaluates and improves its understanding of nature.\r\n\r\n&nbsp;","rendered":"<div style=\"width: 640px;\" class=\"wp-video\"><!--[if lt IE 9]><script>document.createElement('video');<\/script><![endif]--><br \/>\n<video class=\"wp-video-shortcode\" id=\"video-1399-1\" width=\"640\" height=\"480\" preload=\"metadata\" controls=\"controls\"><source type=\"video\/mp4\" src=\"https:\/\/s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com\/courses-images\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/2666\/2018\/12\/25234936\/YerMoth-Fall.mp4?_=1\" \/><a href=\"https:\/\/s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com\/courses-images\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/2666\/2018\/12\/25234936\/YerMoth-Fall.mp4\">https:\/\/s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com\/courses-images\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/2666\/2018\/12\/25234936\/YerMoth-Fall.mp4<\/a><\/video><\/div>\n<div><\/div>\n<div><\/div>\n<div><\/div>\n<h2>Scientific Method&#8211; What is it and why bother?<\/h2>\n<p>Hard rock climbs involve falling. But technology makes these falls pretty safe&#8211; ropes that are strong yet light, expansion bolts that hold multi-thousand pound loads.<\/p>\n<p>Of course, we live in a world where technology is everywhere&#8211; from contact lenses to smart phones to satellite gps (and radio!) and more.<\/p>\n<p>And, sure sure&#8211; we gotta love science because it gives us all kinds of great medicines and technology. But I think there is more&#8230; much more!<\/p>\n<p>We use a kind of scientific approach (rational, logical, testable) to all kinds of things&#8211; how we see law, economics, and perhaps even politics!<\/p>\n<p>Furthermore, science gives us two big ideas&#8230; our world and universe are huge, and they are immensely old!<\/p>\n<p>Scientific Process\/Method is not only at the heart of geology and other scientific disciplines, but in many ways a key part of our culture.<br \/>\nIf we think of science as beginning with IDEAS (hypotheses), followed by well substantiated EVIDENCE and TESTING, and eventually UNDERSTANDING (corroborated theory)&#8211; we have to recognize that this way of approaching problems is also at the root of business, economics, law, politics, and almost everything we do!<\/p>\n<p>(In our culture, we try not to just &#8220;believe&#8221; whatever someone tells us.\u00a0 We &#8220;want the facts&#8221; and we want to understand what those facts imply!)<\/p>\n<div class=\"textbox learning-objectives\">\n<h3>What You&#8217;ll Learn to Do<\/h3>\n<ul>\n<li>View the Scientific Method as a Process<\/li>\n<li>Recognize the Scientific Method as more than a cookbook set of steps!<\/li>\n<li>Form a hypothesis and use it to design a scientific experiment.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/div>\n<p>Sometime in your life you&#8217;ve undoubtedly asked questions about the world around you.\u00a0 Perhaps you&#8217;ve wondered why the sky is blue and not some other color; or why we hear an echo across a big canyon; or why we have seasons or lunar phases.\u00a0 Questions about nature are certainly part of doing science, but contrary to some simplified explanations of science, it&#8217;s much more than just &#8220;asking questions.&#8221;\u00a0 In many ways, good science is all about asking the <em>right<\/em> questions!\u00a0 It&#8217;s about asking the questions whose answers really tell us more about how the world works.<\/p>\n<p>At its essence, doing science involves wondering about how nature works, then coming up with an idea <span style=\"float: none;background-color: transparent;color: #333333;cursor: text;font-family: 'proxima-nova',sans-serif;font-size: 16px;font-style: normal;font-variant: normal;font-weight: 400;letter-spacing: normal;text-align: left;text-decoration: none;text-indent: 0px\">(hypothesis\/theory), and then testing that idea, and re-working the idea till it fits observation, and finally achieving a model that explains certain natural phenomena.<\/span><\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p><img decoding=\"async\" id=\"image\" src=\"https:\/\/s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com\/courses-images\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/2666\/2016\/04\/04170128\/old-woman.png\" alt=\"image\" \/><\/p>\n<p>Ever seen this sketch (by W.E. Hill)??<br \/>\nIt can be seen as an old woman with a big pointed chin&#8211;we see her left side in profile.<br \/>\nIt can also be seen as a young woman with dainty nose and a hint of her left eyelash;\u00a0 we see her left side, but her head is mostly turned away from us, as she is turned to the right.<\/p>\n<p>Like this image, over the last 500 years, scientific revolutions have shown that a reigning perspective on the world is not the only way to see the world.\u00a0 If we look more carefully, it&#8217;s surprising what may be seen!<\/p>\n<p><span style=\"float: none;background-color: transparent;color: #333333;cursor: text;font-family: 'proxima-nova',sans-serif;font-size: 16px;font-style: normal;font-variant: normal;font-weight: 400;letter-spacing: normal;text-align: left;text-decoration: none;text-indent: 0px\">Along these same lines, here is a big idea:\u00a0 Science is NOT &#8220;proving things&#8221; by seeing them happen!<br \/>\nIt&#8217;s NOT very easy to see sub-atomic particles, or the process of macroscopic organisms undergoing speciation, or 80 mile thick pieces of earth&#8217;s crust sliding around, but we&#8217;re pretty confident that we know a lot about these natural processes, and hence we have atomic theory, evolution, and plate tectonics..<br \/>\nIn fact, science often shows us that the world is NOT at all how it looks!<\/span><\/p>\n<h2>Scientific Method<\/h2>\n<p>Ugh!\u00a0 You&#8217;ve probably seen this &#8220;flow chart&#8221; ever since elementary school.<br \/>\nIndeed, the scientific method can be thought of as a series of steps that help us to eventually elucidate the way the world works.<br \/>\nAnd, the steps do &#8220;flow&#8221; in a logical and rational manner.\u00a0 The &#8220;doing of science&#8221;&#8211; from wonder to ideas to testing&#8211; is rooted in a logical approach.<\/p>\n<p>Here is a typical scientific method flow chart.\u00a0 See Figure\u00a01.<\/p>\n<div id=\"attachment_1438\" style=\"width: 484px\" class=\"wp-caption alignnone\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" aria-describedby=\"caption-attachment-1438\" class=\"size-full wp-image-1438\" src=\"https:\/\/s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com\/courses-images\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/115\/2016\/04\/14224210\/Fig_2_1.png\" alt=\"Flow chart depicting the scientific method. All steps can go forward and backward as new information is discovered and as understanding increases. 1) Ask a question; 2) Do background research; 3) Construct a hypothesis; 4) Test with an experiment; 5) Construct a hypothesis; 6) The hypothesis is true, partially true, or false; 7) report results. If the hypothesis is false or partially true, think about what happened and try again.\" width=\"474\" height=\"500\" \/><\/p>\n<p id=\"caption-attachment-1438\" class=\"wp-caption-text\">Figure 1. The Scientific Method<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<h3>An Example of Scientific Reasoning and Process<\/h3>\n<div id=\"attachment_1443\" style=\"width: 360px\" class=\"wp-caption alignright\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" aria-describedby=\"caption-attachment-1443\" class=\"size-full wp-image-1443\" src=\"https:\/\/s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com\/courses-images\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/115\/2016\/04\/14224830\/Fig_2_2.jpg\" alt=\"A field that has recently been harvested; one portion has sunk down giving way to ground water.\" width=\"350\" height=\"233\" \/><\/p>\n<p id=\"caption-attachment-1443\" class=\"wp-caption-text\">Figure 2. Soil is often lost from ground that has been plowed.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<p>Let\u2019s say a farmer is having an erosion problem; every year her farm is losing soil. The farmer learns that a farming method called \u201cno-till farming\u201d allows farmers to plant seeds without plowing the land. She wonders if planting seeds without plowing will reduce the erosion problem and help keep more soil on her farmland.<br \/>\n<span style=\"float: none;background-color: transparent;color: #333333;cursor: text;font-family: 'proxima-nova',sans-serif;font-size: 16px;font-style: normal;font-variant: normal;font-weight: 400;letter-spacing: normal;text-align: left;text-decoration: none;text-indent: 0px\">The process might begin with our farmer doing some research (books, journals, other farmers, etc.) as a means to investigate what causes erosion and how avoiding plowing might help. See Figure 2.<\/span><\/p>\n<h3>Hypothesis<\/h3>\n<p>Consider her <b>hypothesis. \u00a0<\/b><br \/>\n\u201cIf I don\u2019t plow my fields, I will lose less soil than if I do plow the fields. Plowing disrupts the soil and breaks up roots that help hold soil in place.\u00a0 Furthermore, plowing generates flow paths for water that can carry away soil.\u201d\u00a0 A hypothesis is a reasonable explanation that can be tested.<\/p>\n<h3>Experiment\/Testing<\/h3>\n<p>When we design experiments, it&#8217;s best to keep things simple. Ideally, during the experiment we only change one aspect of the system&#8211;the <strong>independent variable<\/strong>.<\/p>\n<p>In this example, the farmer chooses two fields and then changes only one thing between them. She changes how she plows her fields. One field will be tilled and one will not. Everything else (crops, fertilizer, amount of irrigation) will be the same on both fields.\u00a0 These are the experimental <strong>controls<\/strong>.<\/p>\n<p>The farmer will measure how much soil is lost from each field. This is the <strong>dependent variable<\/strong>. How much soil is lost from each field \u201cdepends\u201d on the plowing method.<\/p>\n<h3>Data and Experimental Error<\/h3>\n<div id=\"attachment_1445\" style=\"width: 360px\" class=\"wp-caption alignright\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" aria-describedby=\"caption-attachment-1445\" class=\"size-full wp-image-1445\" src=\"https:\/\/s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com\/courses-images\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/115\/2016\/04\/14224943\/Fig_2_4.jpg\" alt=\"Figure 4. A pair of farmers take careful measurements in the field.\" width=\"350\" height=\"490\" \/><\/p>\n<p id=\"caption-attachment-1445\" class=\"wp-caption-text\">Figure 4. A pair of farmers take careful measurements in the field.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<p>Experimental data involves making measurements using anything from a balance to a ruler to an electron microprobe.<br \/>\nGraphical representation of data is typically useful, comparing independent and dependent variables.<\/p>\n<p>Good to keep in mind&#8211; With measurement, it&#8217;s crucial to understand the capability of our observations and devices.\u00a0 For example,when weighing something, if we find a difference of one gram between experimental &#8220;runs&#8221; and the balance is not capable of reproducing measurements better than plus\/minus a gram or so, then that difference is really rather meaningless!<\/p>\n<p>Scientists speak of <strong>precision<\/strong>, in essence meaning how many digits and decimal places we can record from an instrument. For example, I might measure a weight of soil as 2.569473204 grams, which is rather precise!<br \/>\nBut scientists must also consider the likely <strong>accuracy <\/strong>of measurements, in essence how confident we can be with a particular measurement.\u00a0 For example, if my balance can only reproduce to about one half of a gram, then I should really only say that the soil is around 2-3 grams in weight (and not report any decimals)!<\/p>\n<h3>Conclusions<\/h3>\n<p>Drawing a conclusion requires evaluating the data and deciding how hypothesis fared.\u00a0 Perhaps the hypothesis requires modification (tweaking) and this should then involve more testing.<\/p>\n<p>Perhaps after two seasons of crop growth, our farmer finds that 2.2 times as much soil was lost on the plowed field as compared to the un-plowed field. She concludes that her hypothesis was correct. The farmer also notices some other differences in the two plots. The plants in the no-till plots are taller. The soil moisture seems higher. She decides to repeat the experiment. This time she will measure soil moisture, plant growth, and the total amount of water the plants consume. It&#8217;s a good start, and from now on she will use no-till methods of farming.<\/p>\n<h3>Theory<\/h3>\n<p>In the process of growing up and becoming an adult, there&#8217;s really no exact point where you can say &#8220;Well, yesterday I was a kid, and today I am a full fledged adult&#8221;.<br \/>\nSimilarly, there&#8217;s no one point where a good hypothesis becomes a full fledged and working theory!<\/p>\n<p>Ultimately, enough scientists evaluate and test a hypothesis, and once it works well to explain the world (whether it&#8217;s the behavior of atoms, or light, or shifting continents, or &#8220;no-till&#8221; farming!) then it becomes a useful paradigm for interpreting and acquiring additional knowledge.<\/p>\n<p>It&#8217;s worth noting that the assessment of how well a hypothesis works, prior to becoming a theory, is carefully scrutinized by other scientists.\u00a0 This is generally done via the publishing of papers in scientific journals.\u00a0 Important and trustworthy scientific journals are &#8220;peer-reviewed&#8221; meaning that other scientists will look over the work of those who are publishing.\u00a0 The reviewers are experts in the particular field at hand, and they evaluate the quality of the data and the experiments that have been conducted.\u00a0 If there are discrepancies, errors, or faulty reasoning, then the paper is denied publication.\u00a0 It&#8217;s a bit on the &#8220;rough&#8221; side, but scientists actually take some delight in finding problems with each others work!\u00a0 The good part is that this really makes science quite trustworthy; only very high quality work is allowed to published and become part of the bank of scientific knowledge.<\/p>\n<p>Quantum theory, relativity theory, organic evolution theory, plate tectonic theory, etc etc etc., are incredibly well-tested theories, via literally tens of thousands of experiments and peer-reviewed scientific papers.<br \/>\nAre these well-established theories 100% correct and true and absolute explanations for the world around us?\u00a0 Definitely not!\u00a0 They are very good, but with time most theories are modified and re-worked.\u00a0 Science is not static; it constantly re-evaluates and improves its understanding of nature.<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n\n\t\t\t <section class=\"citations-section\" role=\"contentinfo\">\n\t\t\t <h3>Candela Citations<\/h3>\n\t\t\t\t\t <div>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t <div id=\"citation-list-1399\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t <div class=\"licensing\"><div class=\"license-attribution-dropdown-subheading\">CC licensed content, Original<\/div><ul class=\"citation-list\"><li>Introduction to The Nature of Science. <strong>Authored by<\/strong>: Kimberly Schulte and Lumen Learning. <strong>License<\/strong>: <em><a target=\"_blank\" rel=\"license\" href=\"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0\/\">CC BY: Attribution<\/a><\/em><\/li><\/ul><div class=\"license-attribution-dropdown-subheading\">CC licensed content, Shared previously<\/div><ul class=\"citation-list\"><li>1.1: The Nature of Science. <strong>Provided by<\/strong>: CK-12. <strong>Located at<\/strong>: <a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http:\/\/www.ck12.org\/book\/CK-12-Earth-Science-For-Middle-School\/section\/1.1\/\">http:\/\/www.ck12.org\/book\/CK-12-Earth-Science-For-Middle-School\/section\/1.1\/<\/a>. <strong>License<\/strong>: <em><a target=\"_blank\" rel=\"license\" href=\"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by-nc\/4.0\/\">CC BY-NC: Attribution-NonCommercial<\/a><\/em><\/li><\/ul><\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t <\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t <\/div>\n\t\t\t <\/section>","protected":false},"author":17,"menu_order":4,"template":"","meta":{"_candela_citation":"[{\"type\":\"cc\",\"description\":\"1.1: The Nature of Science\",\"author\":\"\",\"organization\":\"CK-12\",\"url\":\"http:\/\/www.ck12.org\/book\/CK-12-Earth-Science-For-Middle-School\/section\/1.1\/\",\"project\":\"\",\"license\":\"cc-by-nc\",\"license_terms\":\"\"},{\"type\":\"original\",\"description\":\"Introduction to The Nature of Science\",\"author\":\"Kimberly Schulte and Lumen Learning\",\"organization\":\"\",\"url\":\"\",\"project\":\"\",\"license\":\"cc-by\",\"license_terms\":\"\"}]","CANDELA_OUTCOMES_GUID":"","pb_show_title":"on","pb_short_title":"","pb_subtitle":"","pb_authors":[],"pb_section_license":""},"chapter-type":[],"contributor":[],"license":[],"class_list":["post-1399","chapter","type-chapter","status-publish","hentry"],"part":22,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/courses.lumenlearning.com\/colorado-wmopen-geology\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/1399","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/courses.lumenlearning.com\/colorado-wmopen-geology\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/courses.lumenlearning.com\/colorado-wmopen-geology\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/chapter"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/courses.lumenlearning.com\/colorado-wmopen-geology\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/17"}],"version-history":[{"count":29,"href":"https:\/\/courses.lumenlearning.com\/colorado-wmopen-geology\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/1399\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":3444,"href":"https:\/\/courses.lumenlearning.com\/colorado-wmopen-geology\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/1399\/revisions\/3444"}],"part":[{"href":"https:\/\/courses.lumenlearning.com\/colorado-wmopen-geology\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/parts\/22"}],"metadata":[{"href":"https:\/\/courses.lumenlearning.com\/colorado-wmopen-geology\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/1399\/metadata\/"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/courses.lumenlearning.com\/colorado-wmopen-geology\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1399"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"chapter-type","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/courses.lumenlearning.com\/colorado-wmopen-geology\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapter-type?post=1399"},{"taxonomy":"contributor","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/courses.lumenlearning.com\/colorado-wmopen-geology\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/contributor?post=1399"},{"taxonomy":"license","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/courses.lumenlearning.com\/colorado-wmopen-geology\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/license?post=1399"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}