none
In experimental design, the null hypothesis serves as a foundational statement that posits no effect or no difference between groups or conditions. It provides a baseline against which researchers can compare their experimental results. By testing the null hypothesis, researchers can determine whether observed effects are statistically significant or could have occurred by chance. If the null hypothesis is rejected, it suggests that there is enough evidence to support an alternative hypothesis.
No, often there is not enough evidence either way.
It really depends on what your hypothesis is! But I expect a hypotenuse could be more useful in this context. However, knowledge of the hypothesis, hypotenuse even, is not enough to enable you to find the perimeter.
Rejection of the null hypothesis occurs in statistical hypothesis testing when the evidence collected from a sample is strong enough to conclude that the null hypothesis is unlikely to be true. This typically involves comparing a test statistic to a critical value or assessing a p-value against a predetermined significance level (e.g., 0.05). If the evidence suggests that the observed effect is statistically significant, researchers reject the null hypothesis in favor of the alternative hypothesis. This decision implies that there is sufficient evidence to support a relationship or effect that the null hypothesis posits does not exist.
The statement formed when you negate the hypothesis and conclusion of a conditional statement. For Example: If you had enough sleep, then you did well on the test. The inverse will be: If you didn't have enough sleep, then you didn't do well on the test.
theory
In experimental design, the null hypothesis serves as a foundational statement that posits no effect or no difference between groups or conditions. It provides a baseline against which researchers can compare their experimental results. By testing the null hypothesis, researchers can determine whether observed effects are statistically significant or could have occurred by chance. If the null hypothesis is rejected, it suggests that there is enough evidence to support an alternative hypothesis.
The hypothesis can never really be proven correct; that's why scientists always say that they are 99.9% sure about things. If you drop a pencil, it will most likely always fall, but there is the slight chance that someday, it won't fall. Things in science always change.
If your data does not support your hypothesis, it means that there is not enough evidence to conclude that your hypothesis is true. In such cases, you may need to reconsider your hypothesis, collect additional data, or revise your experimental approach. It is important to acknowledge and learn from results that do not support your initial hypothesis in order to refine your research and understanding.
* a proposal intended to explain certain facts or observations * a tentative insight into the natural world; a concept that is not yet verified but that if true would explain certain facts or phenomena; "a scientific hypothesis that survives experimental testing becomes a scientific theory"; "he proposed a fresh theory of alkalis that later was accepted in ... * guess: a message expressing an opinion based on incomplete evidence
We are currently in the experimental stage.They have a very experimental love live.These experimental conditions are not good enough.
whether the data supports the hypothesis
A hypothesis is a statement of theory. Something that is unproven. You gather evidence to support that theory. Gather enough evidence to support and a theory becomes accepted as fact.
A scientific theory summarizes a hypothesis or group of hypotheses that have been supported with repeated testing. If enough evidence accumulates to support a hypothesis, it moves to the next step; known as a theory; in the scientific method and becomes accepted as a valid explanation of a phenomenon.
A solar powered airplane is not an hypothesis. There have been many successful experimental flights. A solar powered plane uses electric motors powered by solar panels (or sometimes batteries charged with solar power). At the present time solar panels are only efficient enough to power very light planes.
My hypothesis is that optimal growth requires enough watering but not too much watering. If the growing plant does not get enough water, it will suffer from dehydration, but if it gets too much, it becomes vulnerable to attack by fungus. For hydroponic gardening, it is sometimes possible to grow a plant in water, with an added anti-fungal agent.
Yes, if there is enough evidence and data to show that the hypothesis is most likely true.