Final answer:
Options 1) and 2) are both suitable hypotheses for the experiment as they are specific and testable, with the expectation of one fertilizer being more effective than the other. Option 3) posits no difference in yield, and option 4) suggests fertilizer type makes no impact, both testable as well. Consistency in experimental conditions and a control group are essential for valid results.
Step-by-step explanation:
The experiment aims to test the hypothesis regarding the effectiveness of two different fertilizers on the production of tomatoes. The best hypothesis should be specific, testable, and measurable. Of the options presented, options 1) and 2) both provide explicit hypotheses that can be tested through the experiment. They state a clear expectation of one fertilizer leading to a greater yield of tomatoes per plant than the other, which is perfect for testing and comparison in the experiment. Option 3) and 4), however, also make valuable hypotheses. Option 3) anticipates that there will be no difference in the yield when using either fertilizer, and option 4) suggests that the type of fertilizer won't have any impact at all, which is also testable.
It's important to note that when setting up a controlled experiment, maintaining consistent conditions across the test subjects (in this case, the plants) is crucial. This means ensuring that all other variables, except for the type of fertilizer used, are kept constant. This includes factors such as the amount of water plants receive, the amount of sunlight, and other care conditions to ensure that the results are due to the difference in fertilizers and not other variables. It is also essential when conducting an experiment to have a control group, a group that does not receive either type of fertilizer in this situation. This control gives us a baseline to compare the effects of 'easygrow' and 'earthworks' fertilizers against.