Question

i need help with a hypothesis?

Answer 1

what hypothesis?

Answer 2

i did an experiment on the enzyme catalase. the aim was to determine effect of temperature on enzyme catalase. I was told a hypothesis was a true statement about the experiment.
This was my hypothesis: catalase breaks down hydrogen peroxide to water and oxygen

My teacher said the hypothesis was wrong so now i need help

Answer 3

oh sorry, got the aim right there

Answer 4

say something in line with you aim as your hypothesis, there should be a correlation between the two: for instance, as the temperature increases, the rate of enzyme activity increases and take into consideration the fact that high temperatures denature enzymes hence they will no longer be effective in catalyzing reactions.

Answer 5

they get denatured because their active site (binding site) get destroyed.

Answer 6

my new hypothesis: It is predicted that when the temperature of the enzyme is increased the enzymes activity will increase once but it has passed the optimum temperature the enzyme will denature and become destroyed

Answer 7

yeah, thats a good one. guess your teacher has to mark you correct now, guess you got it.

Answer 8

thanks for your help

Answer 9

much appreciated...good luck!!!

Answer 10

may i ask an irrelevant question?what time is it where you are?

Answer 11

well one correction: its not the temperature of the enzyme like you sad, its for the whole medium of which the reaction is carried out in.

Answer 12

" I was told a hypothesis was a true statement about the experiment. "

Not really.
The hypothesis is a prediction of what you think will happen. It's usually made before / is the reason for the experiment, and the experiment is done to prove or disprove the hypothesis.

For example, say I have a thought that 90% of women will melt if sprayed with water. I want to know if this is true. That statement then is my hypothesis, and I would then create an experiment involving women and spraying them with water and recording the results.

Answer 13

I just wanted to expand on what PsychoTink was saying because some professors are sticklers about stating hypothesis and I'm wondering if yours wants you to state a null hypothesis? ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Null_hypothesis)

So in the example above, your Null hypothesis would be "Women, when sprayed with water, will NOT melt." So then your alternative (real) hypothesis is the thing you think is the truth (women melt when wet).

So, back to your hypothesis -- you've got mechanism in there, which isn't something that belongs in a hypothesis (if you're writing a lab report, that will go in a different section):

"It is predicted that when the temperature of the enzyme is increased the enzymes activity will increase once but it has passed the optimum temperature the enzyme will denature and become destroyed"

"Above X degrees, enzyme activity will cease." might be a testable statement that you could run an experiment to prove false or fail to prove false. Or "Increases in temperature up to X degrees will increase enzymatic activity."

Answer 14

A hypothesis may be true of false, the aim of the experiment is to test the hypothesis

a null hypothesis for this experiment could be that temperature will not affect the rate of reaction,
a positive hypothesis could be that temperature will correlate with the reaction rate,

you wont know whether your hypothesis is true or false until you have analyzed your results,
and even then you can only find that your data supports or does not support your hypothesis

Answer 15

The way i remember it, it's basically
Hypothesis being the prediction you want to find out i.e: Statins will decrease BP than placebo.

While Null Hypothesis would be: There is no diffrence between statins & Placebo in decreasing BP.

And you don't work trying to prove your hypothesis, but rather working trying to disprove it through the Null hypothesis, otherwise you are more prominent to side with a hypothesis you want to be right. If you work on trying to disprove the Hypothesis you're also safeguarding the theory from multi diffrent parameters you'd approach trying to disprove it. If you don't do the experiment this way before you publish chances are high you'll get eaten alive by the critic community of your peers.