>To pretend they're not relying on induction, people test "the null hypothesis", hopping to statistically disprove it. Popper himself doesn't say that disprovi

>To pretend they're not relying on induction, people test "the null hypothesis", hopping to statistically disprove it. Popper himself doesn't say that disproving the null hypothesis leaves you with the correct one. The problem lies with people who use disproving the null hypothesis as a way of validating the alternative hypothesis. The fact that they feel compelled to seek indirect validation of the model via disproving one other hypothesis is closer to logical positivism, isn't it, where people feel compelled to have a validation for every statement? So isn't p-value testing just logical positivism in the garb of Popperianism? Popper himself in this case would have tried to disprove the actual hypothesis and acknowledged it as a probably valid one in case if didn't find any mistakes, wouldn't he?