How to address experimental error in conclusion

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around how to address experimental error in the context of verifying a theory through experimental data. Participants explore the implications of statistical analysis on the validity of the theory and how to articulate the results in an essay summary.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant notes that the theory predicts the direction of change for a variable F correctly 90% of the time, with an average error of 0.5 Newtons, questioning how to express this in terms of "proving" the theory.
  • Another participant challenges the notion of "proven," emphasizing the importance of addressing the 10% of incorrect predictions and the implications of the error margin.
  • Concerns are raised about the appropriateness of the experimental method used, which involved monitoring two independent variables to derive a dependent variable, suggesting that this may affect the validity of the results.
  • A suggestion is made to conduct a statistical analysis on the data set to better understand the results and their implications for the theory's verification or falsification.
  • Participants discuss the need for specific outcomes from statistical analysis, including confidence intervals and hypothesis testing, to assess the significance of errors in relation to the theory.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on how to interpret the results of the experiment and the validity of the theory. There is no consensus on how to articulate the findings in terms of proving the theory, and the discussion remains unresolved regarding the best approach to analyze and present the data.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight limitations related to the experimental design and the need for a more rigorous statistical analysis to understand the implications of the results. There are unresolved questions about the sources of error and how they impact the conclusions drawn from the experiment.

24forChromium
Messages
155
Reaction score
7
I am writing an essay which includes the experimental "verification" of a theory. As it turns out, the theory was able to predict a certain variable F's direction of change (i.e. increase or decrease across two data points) "correctly" for 90% of the time, and predicts the value of F at each point with an average error of 0.5Newtons.

How should I say the theory is "proven" and to what extent in the experiment's summary?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
24forChromium said:
I am writing an essay which includes the experimental "verification" of a theory. As it turns out, the theory was able to predict a certain variable F's direction of change (i.e. increase or decrease across two data points) "correctly" for 90% of the time, and predicts the value of F at each point with an average error of 0.5Newtons.

How should I say the theory is "proven" and to what extent in the experiment's summary?

Proven? What about the 10% of the time or the ##\pm## .5N? That's what you want to talk about, not that they theory was "proven." What were sources of error, ways to design a better experiment? Limits on results?

How did you analyze your data?
 
Student100 said:
Proven? What about the 10% of the time or the ##\pm## .5N? That's what you want to talk about, not that they theory was "proven." What were sources of error, ways to design a better experiment? Limits on results?

How did you analyze your data?
The method I used is kind of inappropriate, I monitored two independent variables and used the theory to get the dependent, the dependent is also measured experimentally. After that, the predicted values of the dependent F is compared to the empirically observed F.
 
24forChromium said:
The method I used is kind of inappropriate, I monitored two independent variables and used the theory to get the dependent, the dependent is also measured experimentally. After that, the predicted values of the dependent F is compared to the empirically observed F.

Then you might want to do a statistical analysis on your data set.
 
micromass said:
Then you might want to do a statistical analysis on your data set.
I am afraid that this reply is not specific enough. What kind of results should the analysis yield and how are they related to the verification/falsification of the theory?
 
24forChromium said:
I am afraid that this reply is not specific enough. What kind of results should the analysis yield and how are they related to the verification/falsification of the theory?

I'm afraid that's for you to figure out. But generally, if you have a theory that you want to verify experimentally, then using a statistical analysis is crucial. Just saying "it predicts it correctly 90% of the time" is not saying much. You need to study the errors and whether the errors are significant enough to reject the theory. I suggest you study confidence intervals and hypothesis testing. Maybe even regression analysis.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
3K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
4K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K