There are no Experiments in Astronomy,- how can it be considered a science/
i do think astronomy is a science but i dont know how to justify
@Thabo
how can you say there are no experiments? COBE?
where is the controlled experiment?
We do have observations like the motion of heavenly bodies and all.. And all those number of scientists working day and night to study the universe... What do you think they do? Well, I get your point, we can't experiment with earth or any other heavenly bodies in lab.. Yeah that's not possible but that is not enough to say "astronomy is no science" And we do have theories, hypothesis and laws in astronomy... Aren't they enough to prove "Astronomy is science"...??
We can't conduct any experiment using stars and planets, but we can measure their masses and coordinates and other parameters using methods approved on Earth, and then construct appropriate theories on them. So why astronomy not to be a science? It uses scientific methods to build itself.
observations are not enough because correlation does not imply causation
I think using this argument we can exclude any experimental science from the list of sciences.
I just discovered a new topic which has so far been included in "science", to be precise "physics" but it is no science according to @UnkleRhaukus point of view.. Its Magnetism.. Everything begins from a monopole but no physicist has ever discovered a monopole.. Forget about experimenting with it... What do you say guys??
When you conduct an experiment you measure parameters related to each other, for example when you measure your weight actually you are seeing the force of spring of spring balance, because due to the Second the third laws of Newton and the Law of Hook there are some correlations between mass, acceleration, and displacement of spring etc. So when you see your "weight", actually you are seeing the deviation of the hand of spring balance. That means you measured it using correlations, not directly. So the most basic experiment of measuring mass of a person which millions people conduct everyday throughout the world is based on correlations.
Astronomy does involve experiments. For example, analyzing the spectra of stars. Hubble found that most stars far away have spectra which are more shifted towards the red side, meaning that they are moving away. Astronomy involves spending nights with a telescope observing stars, planets and everything else in the night sky. This is observation. Then the data collected is analyzed, and a hypothesis is formed. Astronomy also involves building spacecrafts, sending them to space etc. The sun and stars are far away, so we can't experiment with them. But analyzing their radiation is sort of an experimental observation. When you research in astronomy, you can mostly form 'theories' but not test them experimentally always. For example, Stephen Hawking theorized that black holes must emit radiation. No one can go to a black hole and conduct experiments to check whether this is true.
i suppose astronomy experiment is analysis of data from the frequency domain data rather than time domain
all sciences are derived from axioms, all sciences, such as biology, chemistry, ecology, etc, are based on physics, and physics is based on axioms, such as there is gravity, objects have mass astronomy is no different
what is your definition of science and experiment, scientific method?
when i say experiment i mean really mess around with all of the parameters one at a time
I think you have to consider the scientific method, what is accepted by the scientific community, having a peer review process to validate the data and results. You don't need to change parameters one at a time. if you can't change gravity, how do you know its there? if you don't have mass, how is chemistry done? if the sun doesn't shine visible light, how do we know there is colour?
is there colour?
Join our real-time social learning platform and learn together with your friends!