4 ms·

"Over several decades a number of drips did form in the funnel and fall into the jar, giving credence to the hypothesis that pitch is indeed viscous." It sound

"Over several decades a number of drips did form in the funnel and fall into the jar, giving credence to the hypothesis that pitch is indeed viscous." It sounds like the experiment, as designed, reached a conclusion in far less time than 69 years. It just took 69 years for someone to think about video taping it.

RobAley 13y ago
Nope, assuming they designed it for scientific rigour. Without observation, it would be impossible to say, for instance, that some external force (vibration, wind, mischievous students) hadn't caused the drip to form or fall/break off. The experiment didn't reach a firm conclusion (to some level of certainty) without observation.
- nagrom 13y ago
  That's what the parent said: there were previous chances to definitively end the experiment by observing drips, but no-one thought to monitor it with a video camera until recently. There was no need to wait 69 years.
  - RobAley 13y ago
    No, they said "It sounds like the experiment, as designed, reached a conclusion". As designed it didn't, as they didn't include camera-based observation in the design, the design called for someone to notice the drip to prove the viscosity of the substance, and that didn't happen until now. Maybe it was a badly planned experiment (or more likely, the cost/availability of cameras in those days prohibited their inclusion in the plans). Nevertheless, no firm conclusion can be drawn that the experiment could have been ended early, those previous "drips" may not have happened without external forces applied and so even if cameras had been used it may not have ended until now. Its probably likely that it would have ended had cameras been available, but the scientific method generally calls for a greater degree of certainty than "probably likely" before calling an experiment a success. And of course, it is called an "experiment", not a "certainty". Mistakes happen and they're not always optimal, that’s all part of the fun of science!
- kriro 13y ago
  What if it's quantum-dripping and only dripped because of the camera :P
  - vacri 13y ago
    Schrödinger's Drip doesn't quite have the same ring to it.
stevewilber 13y ago
Why does a drop need to fall in order to prove the theory? Isn't seeing the drip forming enough?

RobAley 13y ago

Nope, assuming they designed it for scientific rigour. Without observation, it would be impossible to say, for instance, that some external force (vibration, wind, mischievous students) hadn't caused the drip to form or fall/break off. The experiment didn't reach a firm conclusion (to some level of certainty) without observation.

nagrom 13y ago
That's what the parent said: there were previous chances to definitively end the experiment by observing drips, but no-one thought to monitor it with a video camera until recently. There was no need to wait 69 years.
- RobAley 13y ago
  No, they said "It sounds like the experiment, as designed, reached a conclusion". As designed it didn't, as they didn't include camera-based observation in the design, the design called for someone to notice the drip to prove the viscosity of the substance, and that didn't happen until now. Maybe it was a badly planned experiment (or more likely, the cost/availability of cameras in those days prohibited their inclusion in the plans). Nevertheless, no firm conclusion can be drawn that the experiment could have been ended early, those previous "drips" may not have happened without external forces applied and so even if cameras had been used it may not have ended until now. Its probably likely that it would have ended had cameras been available, but the scientific method generally calls for a greater degree of certainty than "probably likely" before calling an experiment a success. And of course, it is called an "experiment", not a "certainty". Mistakes happen and they're not always optimal, that’s all part of the fun of science!
kriro 13y ago
What if it's quantum-dripping and only dripped because of the camera :P
- vacri 13y ago
  Schrödinger's Drip doesn't quite have the same ring to it.

stevewilber 13y ago

Why does a drop need to fall in order to prove the theory? Isn't seeing the drip forming enough?