In reading Beyond Falsifiability: Normal Science in a Multiverse by Sean Carroll the article discussed the means in which scientist are able to develop experiments through the idea of falsifiability. Carroll acknowledges that test are ongoing and allow “for the best possible understanding.” Carroll clearly defines how falsiability allows for better scientific theories. Falsifiability gives definiteness, and empiricism. In Sean Carroll’s article he states that we can’t test things that we cannot see. He mentions the universe and how scientist want to say that certain things exist out in the universe, but it can never be proven because the universe is very big and continuously growing. Carroll says that, “what happens outside the universe we can possibly observe …show more content…
The Scientific Method that has been taught in schools has shown that we need to be able to make an observation, first by forming a question about something that we want to observe. Once the hypothesis is drawn out the hypothesis can be tested. The hypothesis can then be proven or disproven. After the test has been done there is nothing more to it than that, at least that’s what we have all been taught to think. In taking other science courses the development of the old scientific method has been broaden to allow us to know that experiments do not end with one test but, yet they undergo extensive testing. The way in which the hypothesis is tested changes from time to time with new discoveries. The scientific method is also not a step by step procedure when conducting an experiment, the steps in which the experiment is done does not matter. When we compare The Scientific Method and Falsifiability we can see that they do go hand in hand because the idea of falsifiability is to prove whether something is able to be tested and experimented