Question

Arnaldo is a researcher who develops a new hypothesis about the properties of electrons. He generates a hypothesis that goes against Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle, a theory that has been supported by many experiments including those done by Neils Bohr. Arnaldo decides that he wants to test his hypothesis to see if data support it. He brings his teacher the following plan to test his hypothesis:

1. Research Heisenberg’s principle.

2. Recreate Heisenberg’s experiments.

3. Research Bohr’s wave-particle duality principle.

4. Recreate Bohr’s experiments.

What is wrong with Arnaldo’s plan?

A.)Researching and redoing previous experiments will not test a new hypothesis.
B.)Research is not involved in scientific inquiry.
C.)Electrons are too small to have experiments done on them.
D:)Bohr’s and Heisenberg’s experiments created laws that cannot be changed.

Answer 1

Researching and redoing previous experiments will not test a new hypothesis. Option A.

Arnaldo's plan is flawed because it primarily involves researching and recreating established experiments by Heisenberg and Bohr.

Testing a new hypothesis requires designing and conducting novel experiments specifically tailored to address the unique aspects of Arnaldo's hypothesis.

Merely replicating existing experiments won't challenge or validate his innovative ideas. Scientific inquiry involves formulating new experiments, collecting original data, and analyzing results to either support or refute a hypothesis.

Arnaldo needs to design experiments that directly address his hypothesis about electrons, ensuring a rigorous and unbiased assessment of its validity in the context of known principles.