Scientific Method and Spontaenous Generation (Microbiolog)

AI Thread Summary
The discussion emphasizes the significance of the scientific method in evaluating the theory of spontaneous generation, which posited that living organisms arise from non-living matter. It highlights that the scientific method encourages continuous testing and re-evaluation of theories, allowing previously accepted ideas, like spontaneous generation, to be disproved over time. Participants suggest that the focus should be on specific experiments that could be conducted to challenge the spontaneous generation theory, rather than general philosophical musings. The conversation underscores the dynamic nature of scientific inquiry, where even established theories can be questioned and tested. Ultimately, the scientific method remains crucial for advancing understanding in microbiology and other fields.
Edin_Dzeko
Messages
204
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Scientific Method - Set procedures / steps to investigating a thought / observation
Spontaneous Generation - Living things came about by non-living things


Homework Equations


Define the importance of the scientific method with respect to the theory of spontaneous generation.


The Attempt at a Solution


I'm thinking:

The scientific method doesn't really take anything as "set in stone" even after something has become a theory it can be later disproved? So although many believed Spontaneous Generation, as the years went by it was disproved. And that's the importance of the scientific method with respect to the theory of spontaneous generation it allows for everything and anything to be tested.

Is that it?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I think you are expected to explain how the scientific method was used to disprove SG theory, not to write some general/philosophical comments.
 
I agree with Borek. What experiments would you do (even today) to disprove spontaneous generation?
 
Thread 'Confusion regarding a chemical kinetics problem'

Thread 'Confusion regarding a chemical kinetics problem'

TL;DR Summary: cannot find out error in solution proposed. [![question with rate laws][1]][1] Now the rate law for the reaction (i.e reaction rate) can be written as: $$ R= k[N_2O_5] $$ my main question is, WHAT is this reaction equal to? what I mean here is, whether $$k[N_2O_5]= -d[N_2O_5]/dt$$ or is it $$k[N_2O_5]= -1/2 \frac{d}{dt} [N_2O_5] $$ ? The latter seems to be more apt, as the reaction rate must be -1/2 (disappearance rate of N2O5), which adheres to the stoichiometry of the...
View full post »

Thread 'Prove that evolution is constant (Provide at least two arguments to support your position)'

I don't get how to argue it. i can prove: evolution is the ability to adapt, whether it's progression or regression from some point of view, so if evolution is not constant then animal generations couldn`t stay alive for a big amount of time because when climate is changing this generations die. but they dont. so evolution is constant. but its not an argument, right? how to fing arguments when i only prove it.. analytically, i guess it called that (this is indirectly related to biology, im...
View full post »

Similar threads

News Post-Scientific Technocratic Methodologies
Replies
12
Views
3K
Exploring the Frontiers of Physics: An Amateur Scientist's Journey
Replies
1
Views
1K
Fact checking - Scientific method
Replies
14
Views
3K
Studying I have some epic math goals and creating a study plan
Replies
11
Views
3K
Philosophy and Physics-physics needs philosophy?
Replies
2
Views
3K
What drives a polymath's insatiable curiosity and love for scientific method?
Replies
7
Views
2K
I The standard model from loop quantum gravity via spinors octonions
Replies
26
Views
4K
Is the Scientific Method Inherently Flawed?
Replies
24
Views
6K
Do you think a new method will eventually replace the Scientific Method?
Replies
21
Views
5K
B Is What we Know for Now Certain?
Replies
4
Views
1K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top