Intergalactic Summit

I can find no fault with this.

Proper scientific method does not necessarily mean you are doing good science.

*grinds her teeth and after a very long pause says flatly* I also can find no fault with this. Fairly well done in terms of presentation issues. Other issues perhaps should be the subject of other guides. Perhaps Mr. Ixiris could take the time to do one on the Scientific Method.

At least they contribute. What do you contribute Rella? Aside from wrecks and a dramatic corp.

False! Science must always be held to scrutiny! You must make sure that the experiment be repeated to acquire the same results AND that the results cannot be disproved AND it can be supported by alternative experiments!

You throw ISK at it, of course, because as it turns out, science is an expensive pursuit. For every breakthrough there's hundreds, perhaps thousands more that simply fall apart and fail to generate any desired result. However, what happens after you get the ISK to set up all the tools required to discern the truth of the matter?

You form a hypothesis, you design and run the experiment, you then either redo the experiment because the results simply do not match up with the hypothesis, or you rework the hypothesis to try again. And again. And again. Then you repeat the experiment to ensure that the results can be repeated.

What happens after that? You DISPROVE your own hypothesis. Or you submit it to peer review and have them disprove it for you. You want to make sure there's no alternative hypothesis behind the results you are getting before you can bump it up to theory. Because science and the knowledge it provides is not perfect. It is limited by human knowledge and senses and other follies. It must be confirmed, again and again and again, until you are triple sure! And even then the acquired knowledge is only tentatively true until proven otherwise in a latter date.

This is why everything must be documented! The entire experiment must be documented. Results, methods, each and every detail has to be put into writing. This is so that the experiment can be studied, repeated, re-tested, until it is certain, without a doubt, that the hypothesis is ironclad enough to be made into a theory. It is also why the experiments had to be ethical, to ensure that nobody, NOBODY AT ALL, can hesitate to rerun the whole experiment over and over and over for years to come until they are satisfied that the hypothesis, and the resultant theory, holds true, at least enough for practical applications. If you do NOT do any of these, you are failing the purpose of Science! Getting the result, without stating, black-and-white, how the result is achieved, is no better than witchcraft!

Perhaps we should all go about becoming a problem for Ms. Hydreiga and hope she throws money at us to make us go away.

-Eran

For someone who deals a lot in chemicals, I don't have much interest in science; I pay those who do to worry about it all for me.

And to be honest, scientists are dull, obnoxious people at best. Do we really want to encourage them to share more of their drivel?
They should just stay in their labs, do their work and keep quiet.

When it comes to Science and Technology, sharing between peers is a must. Even if the papers aren't always released to the public, they are usually, required in fact, shared between other researchers and the odd engineers. Of course, some contributors share more freely than others.

By that I meant you might need to make a transaction to read some papers beyond just the abstract.

Ms. Hydreiga,

I think perhaps you are confusing basic, or "pure", science with applied science.

One definition I've found on the Galnet of "applied science" explains "Applied science is a discipline of science that applies existing scientific knowledge to develop more practical applications, like technology or inventions."

However, to develop that knowledge, you need basic science to understand the fundamental laws of the universe and the different branches of the sciencies. The Amarr of course, believe, that God has laid down these laws and have sought to discover them - much of the Scriptures comprises the results of this search. Others of less spiritual bent (or no bent, frankly) recognize that the universe has laws or rules by which it operates (in the sense that certain matters will be repeatable and predictable) and have sought to discover them. Others then seek to apply those laws for more practical applications - hence applied science.

The ethics or morality of the methods of research or the applications of science is another aspect all together.

Uncordially yours,

Lunarisse Aspenstar Daphiti

P.S. I have added another 10 million to your bounty.

Unfortunately, I can't agree with this.

Proper scientific method ensures, that your results are described in the extent for everyone to be able to repeat the experiment and obtain same values; it also ensures that the conclusions are based on your data and on reported results of others, that can be confirmed as well; and it ensures that the knowledge you obtain is unique and meaningful.

That is basically what makes good science.