In terms of the scientific method, how does astronomy differ from a lab science like chemistry or biology? How can astronomers be confident of their understanding of objects that are remote from the Earth?
Answers
Answer:
In terms of the scientific method, how does astronomy differ from a lab science like chemistry or biology?
Get the truth about online doctors' visits for RA.
According to me Astronomy and lab sciences are quite different in their own way . Astronomy is a vast subject when compared to chemistry / biology .Astronomy is like a parent to all these sciences because we study from the very beginning of the life form or the very beginning of these chemicals . We even search what made these life form , when have they evolved , what chemical changes were occured , what chems are formed in what periods and temperature changes made these possible and so.Though the progress they might have achieved is a bit higher in these lab sciences they couldn't be compared with each other . Physics is the most Nobel awarded field thats because there's lot of subject and matter to be discovered , to be known ,to be explored . Though the experimental procedures might not be done here ,a belief in our collected data till date , and forming a new set of assumptions and hypothesis are most crucial here. In lab sciences one have a physical qualities mostly justified whereas in astronomy the physical presence is a justification for further inventions . One must be very careful in making predictions in here whereas in lab sciences through practical procedures the assumptions are cross verified . In astronomy the observations are the proof of a theory ,in lab sciences a practical result is the proof of theory/assumption . Astronomical observations may not be cent percent clear unlike lab sciences have 100% clear .
Example consider a lab experiment that carbon has some X electrons in its outer orbit and as it was a practical and provable thing they are accepted
In astronomy consider ,Einstein's theory of general relativity or any poplar theory regarding our cosmos , these are said to be accepted if they satisfy the previous observations or if they have answered previous unanswered mysterious hypothesis .It's more like a assumption satisfies another assumptions in the most acceptable way.
Astronomers can be confident of their understanding because one have a lot of observations to be ticked for a particular understandings. If these form a good conceptual understanding and a reasonable justifications then it's a thing that can be one confident of.