Difference between revisions of "How science works and other philosophical musings"
From CoolWiki
Jump to navigationJump to search| (10 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
=Most coherent, developed, tested materials= | =Most coherent, developed, tested materials= | ||
| − | = | + | *<font color="red">Placeholder for Vin's suggestion - Introduction to How Astronomers do Research</font> |
| + | |||
| + | *[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kIbWKlAgHPM Movie (16:01) on What is Science] by Dr. Luisa Rebull (2016) | ||
| + | |||
| + | *[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ej4ZUOdvU7o Movie (15:27) on FAQs on Being an Astronomer] by Dr. Luisa Rebull (2016) | ||
==Real science vs. textbook science== | ==Real science vs. textbook science== | ||
''By Dr. Luisa Rebull'' | ''By Dr. Luisa Rebull'' | ||
*Science (history) as presented in textbooks may seem a never-ending series of right answers. Real science has a lot of dead ends as we struggle to find out what the ‘right answer’ is. | *Science (history) as presented in textbooks may seem a never-ending series of right answers. Real science has a lot of dead ends as we struggle to find out what the ‘right answer’ is. | ||
| − | *Science problems in textbooks have well-defined problems, specific methods you’re supposed to use to solve them, and right (exact) answers (1.2 can be wrong when 1.3 is right). Real science is not quite “made up as you go along” but it may feel that way in the coming days. Different people approach the same problem in different ways, and many answers can be right (1.2 and 1.3 can both be right). This is not the same as 'there is no right answer.' There is a right answer. But, '''the only way you know it’s the right answer is if you believe that everything you did to get there is right.''' Take a moment and really think about that. That's probably a paradigm shift in the way you normally approach science. Throughout science (and probably life in general), you should always be thinking about what you're doing, and not doing anything blindly just because someone tells you to do so. | + | *Science problems in textbooks have well-defined problems, specific methods you’re supposed to use to solve them, and right (exact) answers (1.2 can be wrong when 1.3 is right). Real science is not quite “made up as you go along” but it may feel that way in the coming days. Different people approach the same problem in different ways, and many answers can be right (1.2 and 1.3 can both be right, depending on the size of your error bars). This is not the same as 'there is no right answer.' There is a right answer. But, '''the only way you know it’s the right answer is if you believe that everything you did to get there is right.''' Take a moment and really think about that. That's probably a paradigm shift in the way you normally approach science. Throughout science (and probably life in general), you should always be thinking about what you're doing, and not doing anything blindly just because someone tells you to do so. |
=Somewhat less coherent (or less standalone) materials= | =Somewhat less coherent (or less standalone) materials= | ||
| + | |||
| + | *[[What this site is not]] | ||
=Other sources of interest= | =Other sources of interest= | ||
| Line 16: | Line 22: | ||
* [https://undsci.berkeley.edu/article/howscienceworks_01 How Science Works], from Berkeley. | * [https://undsci.berkeley.edu/article/howscienceworks_01 How Science Works], from Berkeley. | ||
* [https://www.khanacademy.org/computing/pixar Khan Academy and Pixar] (note from Luisa: I saw this as a traveling museum exhibit at the California Science Center in LA. The point of it was to show how Pixar's animation process works to tell stories, but what I saw in it was a non-linear process similar to how science works, much like the pinball analogy in the California Academy of Sciences video above. I have found that the non-linearity of science often surprises and frustrates people. I wondered if, by learning about a non-linear development process in another context entirely, the non-linearity of science would be easier to understand.) | * [https://www.khanacademy.org/computing/pixar Khan Academy and Pixar] (note from Luisa: I saw this as a traveling museum exhibit at the California Science Center in LA. The point of it was to show how Pixar's animation process works to tell stories, but what I saw in it was a non-linear process similar to how science works, much like the pinball analogy in the California Academy of Sciences video above. I have found that the non-linearity of science often surprises and frustrates people. I wondered if, by learning about a non-linear development process in another context entirely, the non-linearity of science would be easier to understand.) | ||
| + | * [https://www.kqed.org/mindshift/46617/why-isnt-science-class-more-like-learning-to-play-baseball Why isn't science class more like learning to play baseball?] | ||
| + | * [https://www.wsj.com/articles/what-the-pandemic-has-taught-us-about-science-11602255638 Wall Street Journal article on how science works (what the pandemic has taught us about science)] | ||
| + | * [https://www.fastcompany.com/90564801/stem-careers-require-the-same-kind-of-creative-thinking-as-the-arts-says-new-research STEM careers require the same kind of creative thinking as the arts, says new research] | ||
Latest revision as of 17:21, 26 October 2020
Contents
Most coherent, developed, tested materials
- Placeholder for Vin's suggestion - Introduction to How Astronomers do Research
- Movie (16:01) on What is Science by Dr. Luisa Rebull (2016)
- Movie (15:27) on FAQs on Being an Astronomer by Dr. Luisa Rebull (2016)
Real science vs. textbook science
By Dr. Luisa Rebull
- Science (history) as presented in textbooks may seem a never-ending series of right answers. Real science has a lot of dead ends as we struggle to find out what the ‘right answer’ is.
- Science problems in textbooks have well-defined problems, specific methods you’re supposed to use to solve them, and right (exact) answers (1.2 can be wrong when 1.3 is right). Real science is not quite “made up as you go along” but it may feel that way in the coming days. Different people approach the same problem in different ways, and many answers can be right (1.2 and 1.3 can both be right, depending on the size of your error bars). This is not the same as 'there is no right answer.' There is a right answer. But, the only way you know it’s the right answer is if you believe that everything you did to get there is right. Take a moment and really think about that. That's probably a paradigm shift in the way you normally approach science. Throughout science (and probably life in general), you should always be thinking about what you're doing, and not doing anything blindly just because someone tells you to do so.
Somewhat less coherent (or less standalone) materials
Other sources of interest
- How Science Works, a really nice ~6 min video from California Academy of Sciences (2012).
- How Science Works, from Berkeley.
- Khan Academy and Pixar (note from Luisa: I saw this as a traveling museum exhibit at the California Science Center in LA. The point of it was to show how Pixar's animation process works to tell stories, but what I saw in it was a non-linear process similar to how science works, much like the pinball analogy in the California Academy of Sciences video above. I have found that the non-linearity of science often surprises and frustrates people. I wondered if, by learning about a non-linear development process in another context entirely, the non-linearity of science would be easier to understand.)
- Why isn't science class more like learning to play baseball?
- Wall Street Journal article on how science works (what the pandemic has taught us about science)
- STEM careers require the same kind of creative thinking as the arts, says new research
