1. Historical Development (Aïna)
1.1. Paradigm Shifts
1.1.1. history of science was first believed to be linear
1.1.2. Paradigm shift is a fundamental change in approach or underlying assumptions.
1.1.3. Paradigm is a typical pattern of something.
1.1.4. Thomas Kuhn in 1962 with 'The Structure of Scientific Revolution'
1.1.4.1. The development of scientific discovery is cyclical
1.1.4.2. Science is punctuated by revolutions that mark major shifts in scientific understanding
1.1.4.3. Scientific evolution is dynamic and constantly changing.
1.1.4.4. Cycle structure consists of successive periods of ‘normal’ and ‘extraordinary’ science.
1.1.4.4.1. Science cyclical structure can be compared to environmental changes on Earth
1.1.4.4.2. 1. Normal phase
1.1.4.4.3. 2. Discovery
1.1.4.4.4. 3. Crisis point
1.1.4.4.5. 4. Extraordinary phase
1.1.4.4.6. 5. Final phase
1.2. The Scientific method
1.2.1. Francis Bacon was the first to formalise the term.
1.2.1.1. Influenced by Galileo Galilei and Nicolaus Copernicus
1.2.1.2. During his lifetime: 1561 – 1626
1.2.1.3. This new approach: "Novum Organum Scientiarum."
1.2.1.3.1. Inductive reasoning as the foundation of scientific thinking.
1.2.1.3.2. Only a clear system of scientific inquiry would assure man's mastery over the world.
1.3. Would you say Science before Modern Science deserves to be called Science at all? Why/not?
1.3.1. Science is the study of the nature and behaviour of natural things and the knowledge that we obtain about them through observation and experiments. Furthermore, before Modern Science, scientists were still conducting experiments, making discoveries and inventing objects. These scientists were able to make discoveries that taught them a lot about the world they were living in, helping them evolve. For instance, during the 10th Century, Ibn al-Haytham contributed to optics and especially the first correct explanation about how our vision works. Therefore, Science before Modern Science can be called Science because it was built on similar techniques as Modern Science. However, Science before Modern Science was less reliable as we have evolved and made additional discoveries. Science in itself is ever evolving.
1.4. Hisorical periods
1.4.1. Dark Ages (500 to 1100) in Europe
1.4.1.1. Period characterised by lack of progress
1.4.1.2. Knowledge from Romans survived in a few monasteries and cathedrals
1.4.1.3. Knowledge from Ancient Greece mostly disappeared
1.4.1.4. The Catholic Church became extremely powerful, making religious stories and folk psychology govern people's thoughts.
1.4.1.4.1. People who disagreed with these ideas were punished.
1.4.2. The Muslim World (9th to 15th century)
1.4.2.1. During the Dark Ages in Europe, Scientific advances were made in the muslim world.
1.4.2.2. Geniuses in Baghdad, Cairo, Damascus and Cordoba continued the works of ancient Egypt, Mesopotamia, Persia, Greece, India and China
1.4.2.2.1. "modern" science
1.4.2.3. New disciplines emerged
1.4.2.3.1. Algebra, trigonometry, chemistry...
1.4.2.4. Major advances in certain disciplines
1.4.2.4.1. Medicine, astronomy, engineering, agriculture...
1.4.2.5. Arabic texts replaced Greek as the fonts of wisdom, helping to shape the scientific revolution of the Renaissance.
1.4.3. The Renaissance (14th century)
1.4.3.1. A period of reawakening of Science in Europe
1.4.3.2. As European scholars became exposed to knowledge and cultures cultivated in the Islamic world.
1.4.3.3. Isaac Newton, Galileo Galilei, Nicolaus Copernicus, ...
1.4.4. Modern Science (19th century onwards)
1.4.4.1. This is what we know today as science.
1.5. International System of Units (SI, 1960)
1.5.1. There are seven base units in the SI system:
1.5.1.1. the kilogram (kg), for mass.
1.5.1.2. the second (s), for time.
1.5.1.3. the kelvin (K), for temperature.
1.5.1.4. the ampere (A), for electric current.
1.5.1.5. the mole (mol), for the amount of a substance.
1.5.1.6. the candela (cd), for luminous intensity.
1.5.1.7. the meter (m), for distance.
1.5.2. I believe that this is significant to the AOK of Natural Science as it is about discovering the laws of nature through hypothesises being tested through experience and experiments. In order to create a formula, you must have a series of units to use so that everyone will be able to use your formula and test it without the risk of saying a hypothesis is wrong just due to the wrong units being used. However, if the SI were created, everyone must use them as they unify scientists in their research, making it more universal.
1.6. Example: The History of Atomic models
1.6.1. Began with Alchemists (500 BC)
1.6.1.1. However, these Scientists' discoveries are not used today in the atomic model.
1.6.2. Then with Democritus (400 BC)
1.6.2.1. Everything in the universe is made up of matter and matter consists of atoms.
1.6.2.2. Democritus' discovery is still used today as a base in Chemistry.
1.6.2.3. His discovery was also used as a base for Scientists creating atomic models.
1.6.3. There was a long period before Scientists began to study atoms.
1.6.4. John Dalton (1803)
1.6.5. J.J Thomson (1898)
1.6.5.1. Discovery: All matter is made up of particles much smaller than atoms these particles are called electrons. (new atomic model)
1.6.5.2. Discovery: Proved the existence of isotopes in a stable element.
1.6.6. Most Atomic Models were created in the 20th century.
1.6.6.1. Ernest Rutherford (1909)
1.6.6.2. Neils Bohr (1913)
1.6.6.2.1. Discovery: Electrons should move around the nucleus but only in prescribed orbits. (new atomic model)
1.6.6.3. Erwin Schrödinger (1926)
1.6.6.3.1. Discovery: The movements of electrons in terms of wave mechanics. (new atomic model)
1.6.6.3.2. This discovery finalises the evolution of the atomic model.
2. Scope & Application (Sam)
2.1. Reductionism
2.1.1. Reduces theories to basic terms
2.1.1.1. To What Extent?
2.1.2. Eg. Falling in Love (With Reductionism)
2.1.2.1. Psychological Make-up
2.1.2.1.1. Biology
2.2. Two branches
2.2.1. Physical Science
2.2.1.1. Physics
2.2.1.2. Chemistry
2.2.1.3. Earth Science
2.2.1.4. Astronomy
2.2.2. Life Science
2.2.3. Other tools
2.2.3.1. Formal Sciences
2.2.3.1.1. Math
2.2.3.1.2. Logic
2.3. Natural Patterns
2.3.1. What is a pattern?
2.3.1.1. Things that happen regularly
2.3.1.1.1. Misunderstanding of patters
2.3.1.2. Not just a repetition which is identical
2.3.1.2.1. Zebras: Black and White
2.3.2. Beautiful and Remarkable
2.3.2.1. Seemingly no traditional boundaries
2.3.3. How does nature create such patterns?
2.3.3.1. Unlike how we make patterns, nature doesn't have a planner
2.3.4. Examples
2.3.4.1. Snowflakes
2.3.4.1.1. Simple process which creates unique patterns and shapes
2.3.4.1.2. Formal sciences can't explain it fully
2.3.4.2. Turing structures
2.3.4.2.1. Explained in very abstract math terms
2.3.4.2.2. Evidence that Formal Sciences can't always explain things
2.4. Purpose
2.4.1. Overcoming Certain Problems
2.4.1.1. Understanding Certain Things
2.4.2. Natural Phenomena
2.4.2.1. Description
2.4.2.1.1. Prediction
3. Language & Concepts (Ananya)
3.1. Key Concepts
3.1.1. Logical language
3.1.1.1. Must explain causes and effect in order to clarify what findings signify.
3.2. Key Terms
3.2.1. Give AOK a good foundation and structure
3.2.2. Vocabulary is precise
3.2.2.1. Allows scientists to understand and communicate without letting their own biases/interpretations change the meaning
3.2.3. Examples
3.2.3.1. Case study
3.2.3.2. Correlation
3.2.3.3. Aim
3.2.3.4. Hypothesis
3.2.3.5. Method
3.2.3.6. Results
3.2.3.7. Conclusion
3.3. Language
3.3.1. Logical language
3.3.2. How scientists distribute findings to the world
3.3.2.1. Important since the language they use affects how others receive the knowledge
3.3.2.1.1. Mathematical language is central
3.3.2.1.2. Must be careful if uncertain while communicating about something
3.4. Metaphors
3.4.1. Are they appropriate
3.4.1.1. Give abstract things a human value, easier to understand scientific concepts
3.4.1.1.1. Can further relate to a previously known concept when understanding a new one
3.4.1.2. Helps us use things we already know to learn about thing we don't know
3.4.1.2.1. Makes complicated things more understandable e.g. where does rain come from, how volcanoes form
3.4.1.3. Alternative to making new words; as scientific subjects have too much specific vocabulary
3.4.1.3.1. Makes it easier to comprehend
3.4.2. Metaphors are defined as 'literary figures of speech that describe a subject by supporting it on a comparison
3.4.2.1. Examples in NS
3.4.2.1.1. 'Greenhouse' gases
3.4.2.1.2. Electrons 'jump' around from shell to shell
3.4.3. Models are a realistic representation of metaphors
3.4.3.1. Used to solve problems and make future predictions
3.5. Conventions
3.5.1. Ways that things are done within a particular activity or area
3.5.1.1. Natural sciences: rules or guidelines for experimental procedures and publishing of results
3.5.1.1.1. Ensure replicability of findings of an experiment
3.5.1.1.2. Ensures presentation of results is accurate and can be backed up
3.6. Non- language forms of communication
3.6.1. Symbols
3.6.1.1. Constants
3.6.1.1.1. Speed of light in vacuum =c
3.6.1.1.2. Planck constant= h
3.6.1.2. Measurement units
3.6.1.2.1. Time=seconds
3.6.1.2.2. Length=metres
3.6.1.2.3. Current=amperes
3.6.1.2.4. Mass= kilograms
3.6.2. Classification systems
3.6.2.1. Species
3.6.2.2. Elements
3.6.2.3. Quarts
3.6.3. Latin expressions
4. Methodology (Jo)
4.1. Inductive Method
4.1.1. Observation
4.1.1.1. Collecting Data
4.1.1.1.1. Interpreting Data (Causality / Correlation)
4.2. HYPOTHETICO-DEDUCTIVE METHOD
4.2.1. Hypothesis
4.2.1.1. Experimentation
4.2.1.1.1. Confirming / Refuting Hypothesis
4.3. Clinical Trials
4.3.1. Hypothesis / Product (medicine)
4.3.1.1. Tested on people in experiment
4.3.1.1.1. Confirming/ Refuting Hypothesis
4.3.1.2. Double Blind / Randomised
4.4. Theory/Law
4.4.1. Theories explains natural phenomenons
4.4.2. Laws state natural phenomenons
5. Personal Knowledge
5.1. What is the nature of the contribution of individuals you know personally to this area, in terms of your experience?
5.1.1. Regarding physics, contributions usually are just theories/laws. Laws don't have in depth explanations, but we just know they happen. Individuals contributions are usually very important and many of them are used in everyday life, such as Nikola Tesla's contributions.
5.2. What responsibilities rest upon YOU by virtue of YOUR knowledge in this area?
5.2.1. This AOK can be used to understand how the natural world works and the explanations behind certain phenomena. There can be many different explanations for how a certain phenomena happens because in the case of Natural Sciences, there are no real bonds or restrictions to any laws. This means that there are really no right or wrong explanation to a certain phenomena. An example of this is snowflake patterns: Many scientists have tried using formal sciences to try and explain the formation. However, there is still yet to be an explanation as to why the lines are almost identical on all sides of the snowflake. It should be one's responsibility to not rule out an explanation as there are not a lot of boundaries to Natural Sciences
5.3. What are the implications of this area of knowledge in terms of YOUR individual perspective?
5.3.1. The AOK of natural science has been taught at school through most subjects, building and forging what us students believe today. For example, we were taught that the Sun is in the middle of the solar system, this has shaped our perspective of space. For instance, physics has added to my personal perspective as it has taught me how my environment functions and why certain events happen. (eg. the role of gravity)
5.4. What assumptions underlie YOUR own approach to this knowledge?
5.5. Consider the WOKs in relation to your experiences, how have these affected what and how you know in this AOK?
5.5.1. In my opinion, reason has affected how do we know in this AOK, as what we know is based on scientific evidence that proves a certain point. In other words, we believe something because we have tangible evidence supporting a certain hypothesis. Reason also affects what you know in this AOK as we know certain things based on deductions from experiments. This means that our reason helps us decide what is true or not.