issue184 大家好久不见

换色UID: 2658709

TOPIC: ISSUE184 - "It is a grave mistake to theorize before one has data."
WORDS: 519          TIME: 00:45:00          DATE: 2010-3-6 10:18:55

A conclusion of science is always accurate and well supported. However, before any conclusion is established, scientists have made many hypotheses without data and then try to contest it. This progress is indispensable to the finally success.

Data is truly significant when concluding a final result, for the precise of a certain data will increase the convincement of the scientist. For example, a research hold by some American scientists announced nearly that traditional media like newspaper still got its preference from the public than internet. At first glance, many readers suspected this fact in terms of the convenience and instance of the internet benefited people a lot. But the researcher came up a series data following his conclusion. The data proves that several most significant invents were all first published in newspaper, not internet. Thus our readers will nod our head and feel agree to the author. A data makes a conclusion convincing.

On the other hand, we can't always theorize after acquiring data. Data is not always available to all the research. Sometimes scientists need to make hypothesis without any support from data then trying to prove it through experiments. Mendel is good example whose theory was the fundamental of inheritance science. When Mendel started doing his research, he couldn't find and valid data or fact to help him. Then he come up with several hypotheses about the principle of inheritance and set experience and control group according to each of his hypothesis. Then use the result of experience to test the premise. This is how his research works. Without data one can still make hypothesis to prompt the science.

Data should be one thing that help us research, not stop us. Sometimes we may feel lost in a deadlock for there is no data, no evidence to help us. But this might be the great turn in the whole progress of research. A new hypothesis without data to support probably indicates a innovation and revolution at that time. We can find an interesting example from the word "revolution". The ordinary meaning of this word is "the movement of the planet moving around the sun" which is a great threat to the tradition idea of the universe. The scientist can't find any valid evidence or data to prove his ideas using techniques at that time but he contested it only by theory and convinces the public finally. This is how the word "revolution” was attached another meaning of "sudden or huge change". A theory with data is certainly more valid and easily accepted by public while a theory without data still can do this.

Theorizing will never stop. Modern scientists also make research basic on the conclusion Mendel, though the data of his research can't make further contribution to the techniques today. Modern scientists are still finding new clues in his experience in order to make breakthrough in the engineering of inheritance today. An experiment is still valuable without data.

Theorizing in science or other subject is always requiring regardless how tough the condition is. Without data, great thoughts can still born and accepted by public.

qisaimanUID: 2703629

A conclusion of science is always accurate and well supported { it is not always the case}. However, before any conclusion is established, scientists have made many hypotheses without data and then try to contest it. This progress-> process is indispensable to the finally success.

Data is truly significant when concluding a final result, for the precise-> precision of a certain data will increase the convincement of the scientist- > scientific gains. For example, a research hold->held by some American scientists announced nearly that traditional media like newspaper still got its preference from the public than internet. At first glance, many readers suspected this fact->claim in terms of the convenience and instance of the internet benefited people a lot. But the researcher came up a series +of data following his conclusion. The data-> which proves that several most significant invents were all first published in newspaper, not internet. Thus our readers will nod our head and feel agree to the author. A data makes a conclusion convincing.

On the other hand, we can't always theorize after acquiring data. Data is not always available to all the research. Sometimes scientists need to make hypothesis without any support from data then trying try to prove it through experiments. Mendel is good example whose theory was the fundamental of inheritance science. When Mendel started doing his research, he couldn't find and valid data or fact to help him. Then he come up with several hypotheses about the principle of inheritance and set experience and control group according to each of his hypothesis. Then use the result of experience to test the premise. This is how his research works. Without data one can still make hypothesis to prompt the science.

Data should be one thing that help us research, not stop us. Sometimes we may feel lost in a deadlock for there is no data, no evidence to help us. But this might be the great turn in the whole progress of research. A new hypothesis without data to support probably indicates a innovation and revolution at that time. We can find an interesting example from the word "revolution". The ordinary meaning of this word is "the movement of the planet moving around the sun" which is a great threat to the tradition idea of the universe. The scientist can't find any valid evidence or data to prove his ideas using techniques at that time but he contested it only by theory and convinces the public finally. This is how the word "revolution” was attached another meaning of "sudden or huge change". A theory with data is certainly more valid and easily accepted by public while a theory without data still can do this.

Theorizing will never stop. Modern scientists also make research basic on the conclusion Mendel, though the data of his research can't make further contribution to the techniques today. Modern scientists are still finding new clues in his experience in order to make breakthrough in the engineering of inheritance today. An experiment is still valuable without data.

Theorizing in science or other subject is always requiring regardless how tough the condition is. Without data, great thoughts can still born and accepted by public.

It seems this essay tends to disagree with the assertion. However, one cannot identify the main idea from the beginning, nor is there any linking word to help.
Meanwhile, one may notice that the date has wider range than it show in science.
I may run out of time so that is all.
Hope it will help.

换色UID: 2658709

2# qisaiman

what's that?