T

Unit One-Part One - Nature of Science

  • Nature of science

    • It is dynamic and testable.

    • Science as a method for studying nature and designing experiments.

    • Elaboration: Science is changeable; scientists must access data and prove points.

    • Characteristics of science:

    • Studying the natural world by gathering and analyzing data.

    • Unraveling the mystery of how nature works.

    • Reliance on data differs from philosophy, ethics, and religion (these groups rely on faith/personal beliefs rather than provable facts).

  • Scientific Rules (four main rules plus examples)

    • Rule 1: Patterns can be determined through observation and study; assumes that something needs to be figured out.

    • Rule 2: Induction: Assume discovered patterns to be true everywhere across time.

    • Formal idea: for a discovered pattern P, it is assumed to hold for all times t: forall t \, \text{Pattern}(t)

    • Rule 3: Parsimony: If multiple explanations exist, the simplest is most likely true (Occam’s Razor).

    • Example: Evolution showing shared traits and common ancestry.

    • Elaboration: When you lose your key, start with the simplest possible location first; simplest explanations are more likely.

    • Phylogenetic Tree: Build a tree by sampling traits or DNA sequences; pick the simplest tree (fewest assumptions/branches).

    • Non-Scientific Example: The vanishing instructor due to a gap in sensory explanation. Senses may not tell how he traveled. Numerous plausible explanations exist (walk, climb, teleport, clone, portal, etc.); the simplest explanation is often correct but not exclusive.

    • Rule 4: Science uses induction to make generalizations (inferences) based on repeated observations.

    • Repeated observation example: "All the squirrels I’ve seen have fur." → leads to generalization: squirrels have fur.

    • Induction generalizes from specific observations to broader claims; however, generalizations can be wrong (e.g., all swans are white was challenged by the black swan, Cygnus atratus).

    • Historical anecdote: In 1787, England sent convicts to Australia; later, Cygnus atratus (the black swan) was discovered in Australia, challenging the prior generalization.

  • A model and the role of inference

    • A model is a complicated explanation of complex ideas and conceptual networks.

    • Build models using inferences from observations and data.

    • Induction is necessary but has limits; science does not claim absolutes.

  • Scientific statements and hypotheses

    • Must be testable: Propose a hypothesis that is testable and can be evaluated with data.

    • Evaluate the hypothesis with data.

    • Measuring the past uses fossils, air trapped in glaciers, etc.; a hypothesis must be phrased in a testable way.

    • The past can be misconstrued if based on non-measurable evidence; as long as something measurable survives history, testing is possible.

    • Past vs. Modern comparison examples:

    • Can measure air from a million years ago through an iceberg.

    • Viloseraptors: compared to birds (modern birds and dinosaurs relationship).

  • Studying humans and Neanderthals: a case study

    • Humans and Neanderthals coexisted; hypothesis initially posited no interbreeding.

    • About 50,000 years ago, interactions occurred and then dispersed.

    • Earlier depictions as cavemen modernized; evidence shows Neanderthals wore clothes, created art, lived in social groups, and showed signs of spirituality.

    • DNA sequencing (stalagmite-based) indicates interbreeding: most modern humans have about 2\% Neanderthal DNA.

  • The Scientific Method: general flow

    • A simple experiment follows a flow: Observation → Inference → Model → Hypotheses → Measurements → Data analysis → Evaluate hypotheses.

    • If a hypothesis is incorrect, revisit the model and test other possibilities.

    • For big observations, a flowchart-like approach is used: observations lead to inferences, which lead to a model linking inferences to observations.

    • Hypotheses are derived from the model; measurements are taken; data are collected and analyzed.

    • If a hypothesis is rejected, consider alternative hypotheses; the process iterates.

  • Model testing and theory development

    • If a model withstands repeated testing, it is elevated to a theory.

    • The scientific community may replace a model with a theory when the theory best explains the data.

    • Theory in science: a category for the most-supported ideas; no higher level of certainty than the current consensus.

    • If a theory has a mathematical basis, it may be called a law.

    • Theory in everyday language may be used to describe an untested hunch.

    • The terms theory and law are often misused in public discourse; true scientific theories explain facts.

    • Open-minded skepticism is essential in science, but claims should be based on evidence.

  • The dynamic nature of science

    • Dynamic science: science changes with new discoveries and methods; criticism of science often centers on historical assumptions.

    • Example of evolving nutrition science: fat once labeled bad; later sugar also recognized as harmful.

  • Case study: Organization of the heavens (Solar System history)

    • The heavens were studied extensively and used as a calendar;

    • Planets categorized as Terrestrial (rocky) and Jovian (gas giants).

    • Early astronomers and models:

    • Claudius Ptolemy (2nd century A.D., Greek in Egypt): geocentric model with crystal spheres; Earth at center; circular orbits; explained retrograde motion via epicycles; observations were naked-eye.

    • Egypt as a learning center; instrument development allowed better observations.

    • Copernicus (1543 A.D., Polish cleric): heliocentric model with the Sun at the center and circular orbits; however, measurement accuracy was limited.

    • Aristarchus (1st century A.D.) had earlier heliocentric idea; graduate to observational tools allowed refutation of the old model.

    • Kepler (1609 A.D., German mathematician): sun-centered model with elliptical orbits; improved with Brahe’s data; improved orbital predictions.

    • The telescope and better data progressively invalidated earlier models; science is self-correcting as new data emerge.

    • Evolution of major theories: atomic theory of matter; theory of natural selection; plate tectonics.

  • Ensuring quality science

    • Data quality is essential; science is data-driven.

    • Peer review: researchers submit to scientific journals; experts review methods and conclusions; papers may be rejected for poor experimental design.

    • The role of specialized scientific journals in validating research.

  • Experimental design and the importance of good design

    • Sampling bias: biased subject selection can distort results (e.g., selecting only women basketball players or male jockeys).

    • Uneven pesticide exposure as an example bias.

    • Independent variable (IV): the manipulated variable controlled by the researcher.

    • Dependent variable (DV): the measured response.

    • Controlling variables (CV): all other variables kept constant to isolate the effect of the IV.

    • Replication and sample size:

    • More replicates reduce the impact of random variation and help detect true effects.

    • Confounding variables can obscure cause-effect relationships.

    • Example experimental design: fern growth under different watering regimes over 6 weeks, with 3 replicates per group:

    • Group 1: 0 L water

    • Group 2: 0.5 L water

    • Group 3: 1 L water

    • Independent variable: Water

    • Dependent variable: Biomass after 6 weeks

    • Rationale for replicates: to avoid odd responses and to identify outliers; more data improve reliability.

  • Science in Action: Amphibians and wastewater – The Living Filter (Penn State)

    • Usual wastewater treatment: conventional approach releases treated effluent to surface water; can deplete groundwater and cause eutrophication due to Nitrogen and Phosphorus.

    • Penn State Living Filter: spray effluent onto soils; soil and organisms remove Nitrogen, Phosphorus, and other impurities; helps replenish groundwater.

    • “Artificial Rain”: campus wastewater treated and sprayed on-campus; up to 4 million gallons/day; high levels of Nitrogen, Phosphorus, and salts (Sodium, Calcium, Potassium, Magnesium) in effluent; irrigation alters habitat:

    • Wetland formation: limestone depressions create temporary ponds with regular rainfall augmentation.

    • More weeds: nutrient-rich irrigation promotes weeds; can cause trees to fall, increasing light gaps.

    • Ice damage: warm spray leads to ice formation upon release into air; weight can break branches.

    • Less leaf litter: consistently wet conditions reduce leaf litter, impacting habitat for many organisms.

    • Increase in pond plant life: irrigation creates swampy ponds with dense duckweed mats.

    • Eutrophication: excess nutrients feed algae; when algae die, decomposition consumes oxygen, leading to hypoxic/anoxic water and potential fish kills.

    • Pond eutrophication model (in accompanying packet): winter ice and subsequent spring growth cause changes in nutrient dynamics and oxygen availability.

  • Amphibians as bioindicators and vertebrate life cycles

    • Amphibians have complex, multi-stage life cycles; life stages differ in ecology and pollutant exposure.

    • Amphibians are permeable to water and air; eggs, gills, skin, and organs absorb pollutants easily; they are ectothermic (cold-blooded).

    • Tadpoles and froglets: rapid growth rates make amphibians useful for experiments;

    • They occupy a middle position in food webs; their decline signals ecosystem problems.

  • Vernal ponds and amphibian breeding ecology

    • Vernal ponds: temporary wetlands that dry out part of the year; frogs breed in late winter/early spring when ponds thaw.

    • Wood frog (Rana sylvatica): tiny species that breeds in temporary ponds; males arrive earlier and establish territories; territorial dynamics affect mating success.

    • Jefferson salamander (Ambystoma jeffersonianum): longer than a sharpened pencil; unique to certain regions (Ohio and West Virginia); breeds in separate microhabitats.

    • Spotted salamander (Ambystoma maculatum): yellow/orange spotted pattern; eggs laid in clumps; eggs differ in arrangement and mass compared to salamander eggs.

    • Breeding sequence:

    • First, wood frogs breed in temporary ponds as ponds thaw in late March; males arrive 2–3 days before females; territories established; females assess male calls and select territories; eggs laid and fertilized in water.

    • Jefferson salamanders arrive after wood frogs; lead to massed egg deposition by spotted salamanders.

    • Embryos and larvae:

    • Embryos elongate during development; hatch and become free-swimming larvae.

    • Wood frog tadpoles are herbivorous but may cannibalize under stress; salamander larvae are carnivorous and predatory.

    • Impacts of irrigation on vernal ponds:

    • Chemistry: irrigated ponds show higher nutrient levels and lower dissolved oxygen (DO); DO can drop below 0.5 mg/L, reaching zero within approximately 3 weeks.

  • Amphibian field experiments and results (pools, hatching, larval survival, terrestrial stages)

    • Egg mass counts: 10 irrigated ponds vs. 10 natural ponds; spring 1997 and 1998; counts reflect female reproductive output and habitat quality.

    • Hatching success: 3 irrigated ponds and 3 natural ponds; 5 replicates per species per pond; in situ enclosure experiments to gauge hatch rates.

    • Larval survival: same replication scheme; daily monitoring for 6 days; cage/enclosure methods to keep eggs/larvae within test sites.

    • Findings:

    • Spotted salamanders showed low hatching rates in irrigated ponds due to bacterial blooms.

    • Larval enclosures in irrigated ponds showed poor survival; field results indicated negative impacts of irrigation on larval stages.

    • Terrestrial salamander growth in field enclosures showed no clear acute effects; higher body sodium in lab tests suggested stress under wastewater substrates though not necessarily in field conditions.

    • Overall conclusions:

    • Ponds irrigation altered pond chemistry and biology; egg hatching and larval survival were reduced.

    • No acute terrestrial impacts observed in the short term; however, the pond ecosystem and populations were affected overall.

    • The experimental model supported the hypothesis that wastewater irrigation affects amphibian life stages; monitoring is needed for long-term outcomes.

  • Tragedy of the Commons (environmental economics and policy)

    • Definition: a common resource is exploited for individual gain, leading to overuse and depletion.

    • The Commons: resources not owned by a single entity (examples: rivers, communal grazing lands, atmosphere, international oceans).

    • Video reference: Econclips on the tragedy of the commons; Lorax discussion as a narrative example of resource depletion.

    • Historical and modern examples:

    • Classic pasture example: common grazing land was overexploited as private owners added more cattle to shared pasture.

    • Modern pollution example: unregulated driving contributes to urban air pollution; smog is a major danger; vehicles contribute to pollution in Atlanta and other cities; regulation varies by country.

    • Core problem: entities benefit from polluting while society bears the costs; common resources become degraded.

    • Solutions and policy levers:

    • Property rights and assigned ownership of scarce resources can reduce overuse.

    • Bottom-up institutions and governance mechanisms to coordinate use and limit exploitation.

    • Market-based and regulatory approaches to internalize the external costs of pollution.

    • Economic considerations:

    • Profit equation: \text{Profit} = \text{Revenue} - \text{Costs}

    • In competitive markets, raising revenue is difficult; reducing costs (e.g., layoffs) is a common but ethically problematic route.

    • Top-down regulation can correct externalities but implementation varies by jurisdiction.

    • Human behavioral factors:

    • Problem 1: Humans are intelligent but sometimes selfish, prioritizing personal gain over long-term sustainability.

    • Problem 2: Short-term planning tends to dominate over long-term consequences.

    • Problem 3: Perceived exceptionality leads to risk-taking with potential harm to others.

    • Lesson: The tragedy of the commons arises from a mix of biology, economics, and political structure; addressing it requires coordinated policy, incentives, and cultural change.

    • Narrative linkage: Lorax and other stories illustrate how unchecked resource extraction leads to ecological collapse and social consequences.

  • Real-world relevance and connections

    • The dynamic and testable nature of science underpins everyday decision-making (policy, health, environment).

    • Experimental design informs how we test hypotheses about ecological and social systems.

    • Bioindicators like amphibians help monitor environmental health and the effectiveness of wastewater practices.

    • Understanding the tragedy of the commons informs policies on pollution control, resource allocation, and sustainable development.

  • Key equations and quantitative references (LaTeX)

    • Induction generalization across time: forall t \, \text{Pattern}(t)

    • Profit in environmental economics: \text{Profit} = \text{Revenue} - \text{Costs}

    • Notation for scientific reasoning and time-based analysis is used where appropriate in models and tests (no single universal equation governs all cases, but these representations illustrate core ideas).

  • Quick recap of numerical anchors from the transcript

    • Neanderthal DNA in modern humans: \approx 2\%

    • Year of Copernicus’s publication: 1543 A.D.

    • Kepler’s astronomical work: 1609 A.D.

    • Timeframe for vernal pond breeding cycles: late winter to early spring (thawing in late March noted).

    • Observational and experimental replication counts in amphibian studies: multiple ponds (e.g., 10 irrigated vs 10 natural); 5 replicates per species per pond; 3 replicates for some hatching tests; 6-day larval monitoring.

  • Connections to foundational principles

    • Emphasizes the empirical basis of science: observation, measurement, and data-driven inference.

    • Highlights the iterative, self-correcting nature of science as new tools and data become available.

    • Stresses ethical implications of research design, wildlife impact, environmental stewardship, and policy decisions.

  • Bottom-line takeaways

    • Science advances by building models, testing predictions, and refining or replacing theories with accumulating evidence.

    • Experimental design quality (IV, DV, CV, replication) determines the reliability of conclusions.

    • Real-world case studies (Living Filter, amphibian ecology, tragedy of the commons) illustrate how scientific reasoning translates into environmental management and policy challenges.

  • End-of-notes quick questions for review

    • What distinguishes induction from observation in scientific reasoning? Why is induction powerful but limited?

    • How does a model become a theory, and what distinguishes a theory from a law?

    • How can experimental design mitigate sampling bias and confounding variables?

    • In the Living Filter case, what ecological processes lead from nutrient input to potential hypoxia in ponds?

    • What policy instruments can address the tragedy of the commons in modern contexts?