My Map of the Scientific Process - A Request For Discussion, Debate, Agreement, Disagreement and JokessteemCreated with Sketch.

in #steemstem6 years ago (edited)

Last week the Steemstem curation team posted a well thought out request for the Steemstem community to become more engaged involved with each other.

This is my response to that request. Let me know your thoughts below. Do you agree, disagree, see the need for improvements and revision? Don't be shy.

Note: Please do not downvote if you disagree with me. Post your reply telling me why you disagree with me instead. I will not be downvoting anybody's replies.


The image below is my map of the scientific process.

The Theoretical Science to Construction Progression Bar

At the top is a wedge that is intended to metaphorically express the blend of disciplines in going from the purely theoretical (i.e. the theoretical sciences) to the purely practical (i.e. manufacturing and construction).

At the thick end of the wedge people tend to be more scientific and less practical. At the thinner parts of the wedge people tend to be less scientific and more practical but this is not always the case.

There should be no snobbery if you are working in one of these areas against any of the other areas. I know people in all of these categories and they all are highly talented, highly skilled and smart.

Data

It all begins here. The scientific process all starts with data.

A person observes something that seems unusual or out of place.

Data can be easy or hard to obtain. It can be obvious or subtle. It often requires a lot of experimentation and processing before it is even in a usable and convenient form.

Hypotheses

After the observation and processing of data that seems out of place or unexplained is the process of forming an hypothesis (a hypothesis?). An hypothesis should be able to explain all of the observations and to also make predictions.

Hypotheses are low in the scientific hierarchy (even lower than data) until they prove themselves.

Theories and Laws

A hypothesis that has stood the test of time and has been found to explain well a large body of disparate data sets is often called a theory.

If the theory is really fundamental and is used as a foundation for other theories it is often called a law.

Correlations

Sometimes it is not possible to come up with a well founded theory or equation. This is where correlations come in.

An example here is the correlation between the genes in DNA and the resultant expression in a biological entity (IQ genes, height genes etc.).

You should never extrapolate from a correlation. It is always safest to stay within the known bounds of any equation where no one really understands the underlying mechanisms.

Models

We cannot always create fundamental theories and laws, sometimes the creation of models is the best we can do.

A good example is the Standard Model of particle physics. Usually it is not as grand as that and it could just be a model of an electric circuit or a river or a bridge or a tectonic plate etc.

Fudge Factors

In the small text (because it is somewhat embarrassing) is the occasional need for fudge factors for our models. These are often educated guesses about what a parameter should be but sometimes they can be pulled out of thin air just to make the model work.

Fudge factors are the redheaded stepchild of science.

Devices

Devices can be cell phones, computers, bridges, buildings, rockets, telescopes, microscopes and Large Hadron Colliders.

They are usually created from models, even if that model is just a few equations written down in a notebook. A drawing can be a model. Often the models used to create a device are sophisticated computer programs because devices are expensive and you need to get it right the first time.

Devices are used to collect data, and this is where an important feedback loop starts.

Feedback Loops

There are feedback loops throughout the scientific, engineering and manufacturing process map as indicated by the arrows. I doubt that I have represented all the feedback loops that should be there.

Data and testing is a good feedback loop. Peer review is also another necessary feedback loop.

Without feedback loops you only have dogma and stagnation.

Interpretations

Under the category of Metaphysics are interpretations. These are for theories that humans just can't wrap our heads around.

A good example would be the Copenhagen Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics. Another good example is the Many Worlds Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics.

What do we do with interpretations? Are they really science?

They mostly seem un-testable so I put them under the metaphysics category.

Mathematics and Logic

Underlying the whole map is mathematics and logic. Math and science touch in places but not always. Without math science would not get far. Without science math would move along much more slowly.

Some math seems like metaphysics to me but that is a topic for another post.

The Human Mind

Generating all of the above is the human mind with all of its strengths and weaknesses.

Mental Models and Intuition

Everyone in STEM has a mental model of the world. Some are good, some are not so good. It is here that hypotheses get formed and mentally tested. It is here that peer review occurs.

Conjecture and Wild Guesses

Sometimes new observations are so far out there and so unusual that we have no idea what to do with them.

This is where conjecture and wild guesses come into play. The error rate here is much higher but when all else fails this is sometimes what you have to do.

Mental Biases and Agendas

Not all hypotheses are formed innocently and in good faith. All too often there are biases and agendas behind the formulation of hypotheses.

Good examples of hot button topics these days are climate change, vaccines and round Earth versus flat Earth.

Disagreeing with a theory is excellent and encouraged in science. You just need to provide the data and a better, more robust theory that is all.

Thank you for reading my post. Looking forward to your comments.

Sort:  

Congratulations @procrastilearner! You have completed some achievement on Steemit and have been rewarded with new badge(s) :

Award for the total payout received

Click on any badge to view your own Board of Honor on SteemitBoard.

To support your work, I also upvoted your post!
For more information about SteemitBoard, click here

If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word STOP

Upvote this notification to help all Steemit users. Learn why here!

For the most part yes I agree wholeheartedly with your model. The only caveat I'd add is (and this is depending if you want to include social science within your model) interventions and policies as an outcome of applied science. Where we have a feedback loop that cycles between qualitative and quantitative evedence, generating new hypotheses as we go. The issue we often have here is that that the notion of ‘progress’ is debatable here, it's similar instead to dominant paradigms and paradigms shits.

Yeah, I seem to have implicitly ignored the soft sciences in the above map. They tend to be messier and more intuitive than the harder sciences.

Having said that I have no idea how to graphically represent that other than turning everything into a Venn diagram circle and linking them that way.

Ha, yeah that has a tendency to happen. We have a saying in social science (that I just made up) "It's all intuitive apart from all the counter-intuitive parts, and a lot of the intuitive parts are only intuitive in hindsight, and they are likely to change in a few years anyway. So publish quickly!"

I'll give representing the process from our side a proper stab at some point in the future.

Metaphysics is a very hard subject for most to grasp. You then get into alternate realities, and those being my reality is different from yours. my only issue is the word law....as nothing seems to be the case these days. Iv been chastised by others repeatedly for using such a term.....they always say to use theory....to each their own though.

Thx. That's why I put metaphysics off to the side and somewhat separate from science.

Things like the many worlds idea, just what do you do with them? They make for good conversation over a beer but that's it.

Coin Marketplace

STEEM 0.35
TRX 0.12
JST 0.040
BTC 70734.57
ETH 3561.52
USDT 1.00
SBD 4.75