Hypothesis is examined very closely to see what it predicts, and the predictions are then rigorously tested. If the predictions are not supported by the results of experiments, the hypothesis is rejected but if they are confirmed, the hypothesis is supported.
That depends on the result of the experiment. The experiment is a way to test a hypothesis, and it's completely fine if the experiment disproves the hypothesis. Ideally, though, the experiment will support the hypothesis.
No. An hypothesis is an idea put forward to explain an observation. Often you do the experiment to test the hypothesis. The results of the experiment may help you decide whether to discard your hypothesis or to test it further.
Yes. But usually a hypothesis (if, then, because statement) is changed overtime to establish a conclusion on the investigation. The point of the collection of the data is to show whether or not the hypothesis was supported, and if not needs to be corrected/modified. Certain parts may still be helpful/kept but in most cases it is changed
The answer to the question why is this: It can be rejected at a later date because it is falsifiable in nature if it is a good hypothesis. If you meant to ask HOW it can be rejected, the answer is by way of further experimentation that rules out some or all of the hypothesis as stated.
yes
To determine whether Fleming's hypothesis should be supported or rejected based on an experiment, one would need to analyze the results of the experiment in relation to the hypothesis. If the data from the experiment aligns with the predictions made by Fleming's hypothesis, then it should be supported. However, if the results contradict the hypothesis, it may need to be rejected or revised.
It's most likely to get rejected.
Hypothesis is examined very closely to see what it predicts, and the predictions are then rigorously tested. If the predictions are not supported by the results of experiments, the hypothesis is rejected but if they are confirmed, the hypothesis is supported.
That depends on the result of the experiment. The experiment is a way to test a hypothesis, and it's completely fine if the experiment disproves the hypothesis. Ideally, though, the experiment will support the hypothesis.
No. An hypothesis is an idea put forward to explain an observation. Often you do the experiment to test the hypothesis. The results of the experiment may help you decide whether to discard your hypothesis or to test it further.
The Big Bang is a theory in cosmology that explains the origin and evolution of the universe, supported by a significant amount of observational evidence. It is not a hypothesis, as a hypothesis is an initial explanation to be tested and either supported or rejected based on evidence.
It is when you know that your hypothesis is wrong.
Drawing a conclusion apex
Yes. But usually a hypothesis (if, then, because statement) is changed overtime to establish a conclusion on the investigation. The point of the collection of the data is to show whether or not the hypothesis was supported, and if not needs to be corrected/modified. Certain parts may still be helpful/kept but in most cases it is changed
The hypothesis predicts the answer to a scientific experiment. It is a testable statement that guides the research process and can be either supported or rejected based on the results.
A hypothesis will be rejected if it fails the necessary testing required for it to become a scientific theory.