Fire/Arson Investigations :  Fire/Arson Investigations The fastest message board... ever.
A place to ask questions and add to probative and informative discussions associated with the various aspects of the field of fire investigation. -- FORUM RULES---BE CIVIL AND NO NAME CALLING, NO BELITTLING, NO BERATING, NO DENIGRATING others. Postings in violation of these rules can be removed or editted to remove the offending remarks at the discretion of the moderators and/or site administrator. 
Re: Back to basics – testing your hypothesis.
Posted by: Jim Mazerat (IP Logged)
Date: January 22, 2007 12:12PM

Gerald:

I would appreciate some additional input into the accuracy of my statement about a hypothesis only being able to be disproven. I have conducted considerable research into the subject of testing a hypothesis and based on all the documents, papers written, training courses, and discussion with those in the scientific research field I have not found any data that disproves my hypothesis that a hypothesis can only be disproved. One of the sources of my data was the internet. I did a search on the internet by using the search criterion of “hypothesis”, “philosophy”, and “never prove”. The information I obtained from all sources is similar to the following that was produced by P. Compton and R. Jansen, Garvan Institute of Medical Research, St. Vincent's Hospital, Sydney 2010, Australia. They stated in their paper:

"This maintenance experience suggests that knowledge is not sometimes, but always given in context and so can only be relied on to be true in that context. The best philosophical foundation for this seems to be the philosophy of Karl Popper (Popper 1963). Popper suggests that we can never prove a hypothesis, we can only disprove hypotheses. Obviously we cannot disprove all alternate hypotheses, we may not even be able to formulate all the alternatives. What we can only do is to disprove the limited number of likely alternatives. We suggest that this explains the phenomenon in knowledge acquisition that knowledge, the rules for reaching some conclusion, always seem to be context dependant. What the expert is doing is identifying features in the data that enable one to conclude that a certain interpretation is preferable to the small set of other likely interpretations, and of course the likely alternatives depend on the context. This is quite different from reporting on how one reached a given conclusion. These are not novel suggestions."

As this is only a hypothesis on my part, all I can say is that the information found fails to disprove my hypothesis, it by no means is proof that my hypothesis is correct. If you or others have information that does show a hypothesis can be proved to be correct through testing I would appreciate that information.



Subject Views Written By Posted
  Back to basics – testing your hypothesis. 2250 Russaus 01/11/2007 08:08AM
  Re: Back to basics – testing your hypothesis. 1316 cda 01/11/2007 08:38AM
  Re: Back to basics – testing your hypothesis. 1241 Russaus 01/11/2007 08:49AM
  Re: Back to basics – testing your hypothesis. 1219 cda 01/11/2007 10:05AM
  Re: Back to basics – testing your hypothesis. 1317 dcarpenter 01/11/2007 11:38AM
  Re: Back to basics – testing your hypothesis. 1239 greggorbett 01/12/2007 02:58AM
  Re: Back to basics – testing your hypothesis. 1233 dsmith 01/21/2007 03:47PM
  Re: Back to basics – testing your hypothesis. 1257 Jim Mazerat 01/21/2007 07:17PM
  Re: Back to basics – testing your hypothesis. 1313 Gerald Hurst 01/21/2007 09:30PM
  Re: Back to basics – testing your hypothesis. 1130 MIJ 01/21/2007 10:28PM
  Re: Back to basics – testing your hypothesis. 1043 Jim Mazerat 01/22/2007 12:12PM
  Re: Back to basics – testing your hypothesis. 1218 Gerald Hurst 01/22/2007 01:41PM
  Re: Back to basics – testing your hypothesis. 1181 Jim Mazerat 01/22/2007 02:36PM
  Re: Back to basics – testing your hypothesis. 1107 Gerald Hurst 01/22/2007 04:15PM
  Re: Back to basics – testing your hypothesis. 1052 MIJ 01/22/2007 04:17PM
  Re: Back to basics – testing your hypothesis. 1189 Gerald Hurst 01/22/2007 04:35PM
  Re: Back to basics – testing your hypothesis. 1114 MIJ 01/22/2007 05:36PM
  Re: Back to basics – testing your hypothesis. 1138 Jim Mazerat 01/22/2007 06:36PM
  Re: Back to basics – testing your hypothesis. 1071 Jim Mazerat 01/22/2007 06:05PM
  Re: Back to basics – testing your hypothesis. 1200 MIKE 01/22/2007 07:55PM
  Re: Back to basics – testing your hypothesis. 1240 Jim Mazerat 01/22/2007 06:12PM
  Re: Back to basics – testing your hypothesis. 1055 MIJ 01/22/2007 11:33PM
  Re: Back to basics – testing your hypothesis. 1063 Jim Mazerat 01/23/2007 10:31AM
  Re: Back to basics – testing your hypothesis. 1164 PMK140 01/11/2007 11:35AM
  Re: Back to basics – testing your hypothesis. 1221 dcarpenter 01/11/2007 11:15AM
  Re: Back to basics – testing your hypothesis. 1248 dcarpenter 01/11/2007 11:13AM
  Re: Back to basics – testing your hypothesis. 1053 cda 01/11/2007 12:12PM
  Re: Back to basics – testing your hypothesis. 1301 dcarpenter 01/11/2007 01:14PM
  Re: Back to basics – testing your hypothesis. 1135 dcarpenter 01/11/2007 10:39AM
  Re: Back to basics – testing your hypothesis. 1282 Gerald Hurst 01/11/2007 11:21AM
  Re: Back to basics – testing your hypothesis. 1136 PMK140 01/11/2007 11:41AM
  Re: Back to basics – testing your hypothesis. 1082 cda 01/12/2007 03:00AM
  Re: Back to basics – testing your hypothesis. 1109 MIJ 01/12/2007 07:02AM
  Re: Back to basics – testing your hypothesis. 1101 cda 01/12/2007 08:17AM
  Re: Back to basics – testing your hypothesis. 1165 MIJ 01/12/2007 09:02AM
  Re: Back to basics – testing your hypothesis. 1154 MIJ 01/12/2007 09:07AM
  Re: Back to basics – testing your hypothesis. 1078 Jim Mazerat 01/17/2007 11:48AM
  Re: Back to basics – testing your hypothesis. 1305 dsmith 01/21/2007 04:14PM
  Re: Back to basics – testing your hypothesis. 1221 Jim Mazerat 01/21/2007 07:34PM
  Re: Back to basics – testing your hypothesis. 1140 SJAvato 01/22/2007 12:51PM
  Re: Back to basics – testing your hypothesis. 1050 MIJ 01/22/2007 02:06PM
  Re: Back to basics – testing your hypothesis. 973 Jim Mazerat 01/22/2007 02:53PM
  Re: Back to basics – testing your hypothesis. 1025 cda 01/12/2007 08:20AM
  Re: Back to basics – testing your hypothesis. 1202 MIJ 01/12/2007 09:30AM
  Re: Back to basics – testing your hypothesis. 1092 cda 01/12/2007 09:54AM
  Re: Back to basics – testing your hypothesis. 1129 MIJ 01/12/2007 10:00AM
  Re: Back to basics – testing your hypothesis. 1238 Jim Mazerat 01/12/2007 10:26AM
  Re: Back to basics – testing your hypothesis. 1304 The Oracle 01/16/2007 07:02AM
  Re: Back to basics – testing your hypothesis. 1224 dsmith 01/21/2007 03:40PM
  Re: Back to basics – testing your hypothesis. 1234 Jim Mazerat 01/21/2007 07:41PM
  Re: Back to basics – testing your hypothesis. 1225 Tim Pullen 01/16/2007 08:40AM
  Re: Back to basics – testing your hypothesis. 1200 MIJ 01/16/2007 10:06AM
  Re: Back to basics – testing your hypothesis. 1095 Jim Mazerat 01/17/2007 06:33AM
  Re: Back to basics –MIJ: Please give it a rest 1303 John J. Lentini, CFEI 01/17/2007 07:42AM
  Re: Back to basics –MIJ: Please give it a rest 1190 MIJ 01/17/2007 10:10AM
  Re: Back to basics –MIJ: Please give it a rest 1211 Jim Mazerat 01/17/2007 11:54AM
  Re: Back to basics –MIJ: Please give it a rest 1141 MIJ 01/17/2007 03:52PM
  Re: Back to basics –MIJ: Please give it a rest 1245 Jim Mazerat 01/17/2007 04:31PM
  Re: Back to basics Still can't rest 1152 MIJ 01/17/2007 06:20PM
  Re: Back to basics Still can't rest 1285 Jim Mazerat 01/18/2007 10:32AM
  Re: Back to basics - grammar police 1248 jmorse 01/21/2007 03:45PM
  Re: Back to basics - grammar police 1043 Jim Mazerat 01/21/2007 07:18PM
  Re: Testing a hypothesis 1132 Jim Mazerat 01/22/2007 12:20PM
  Re: Testing a hypothesis 1254 SJAvato 01/22/2007 12:56PM
  Re: Testing a hypothesis 1072 Jim Mazerat 01/22/2007 12:58PM
  Re: Testing a hypothesis 1163 MIJ 01/22/2007 02:23PM
  Re: Testing a hypothesis 1099 Jim Mazerat 01/22/2007 02:46PM


Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
This forum powered by Phorum.