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: Scientific Method
Posted by:
dcarpenter (IP Logged)
Date: July 06, 2022 10:40AM
"This is an area we are in total agreement. I believe one investigating with an open mine will develop multiple hypotheses. As to Negative Corpus, I believe that now those that right or wrong opposed that concept are now going after the Process of Elimination. You are right that needs to be a separate discussion."
You need one valid hypothesis to make any determination that is "uniquely consistent" with the available data and evidence. The SM also requires that you CONSIDER alternative hypotheses since the same data set can provide evidence for the reliable formulation of multiple hypotheses. The SM does not require that you formulate multiple alternative hypotheses, only that you consider alternative hypotheses. It can't require that you formulate alternative, only that you consider alternative hypotheses where you only formulate alternative hypotheses if you have the evidence for such.
Consider all the "hypotheses" you want without evidence using Inductive reasoning, but the subsequent steps/iterations of the SM, for reliability, will require that "valid hypotheses" in the context of this specific incident, be formulated with evidence.
Douglas J. Carpenter, MScFPE, CFEI, PE, FSFPE
Vice President & Principal Engineer
Combustion Science & Engineering, Inc.
8940 Old Annapolis Road, Suite L
Columbia, MD 21045
(410) 884-3266
(410) 884-3267 (fax)
www.csefire.com