>"The models that have been thought to predict what should happen are all incorrect"
Plus, this is supposed to be exciting and par for the course for sciene. Observe -> Hypothesis -> Observe -> Repeat.
Plus, this is supposed to be exciting and par for the course for sciene. Observe -> Hypothesis -> Observe -> Repeat.
So many people try to define it as:
Hypothesis -> Observe -> Hypothesis -> Repeat. You even learn it at school where they make you give a Hypothesis before running the experiment, instead of after.
But I would think that if you're being honest with yourself and your results in the "observe" state, regardless of whether or not you had an existing hypothesis, you would draw the same conclusions.
I suppose if you intentionally set out to ONLY observe before hypothesizing, you might eliminate some unintended bias or something.
But if you simply observe you will find out what there is.
It's an issue of imagination.
Also for students it makes them try to predict the results of the experiment - which is utterly pointless. Simply do the experiment and find out - that's the whole point, science is about experimenting, not just coming up with ideas.