The Puzzle (Random Walk) Method

Much is made of the term "The Scientific Method", as if it's a divinely ordained process of thought. What is taught in school and the public sees, is the outdated, "classical" scientific method. In the classical method, much was made of this recipe for truth. It fits in with the idea that the world and all knowledge is logical and rational. The idea that was inherited in the world of education. However, if one examines the history of scientific development and the development of scientific theory, the reality is fair from the concept of The Scientific Method. The irony is, although the scientific method is presented as the method of science, a little known concept from quantum physics - the random walk - is the method that actually worked.

The scientific method sets out to control thought and theory, backed by control experiments designed to show the validity of a theory. Essentially, come up with a "scientific" idea, design an experiment to show this "scientific" idea. This is what's taught and what's behind all "scientific" awards and prestige. Here are portions of a section on The Scientific Method, from the University of Rochester,

II. Testing hypotheses

As just stated, experimental tests may lead either to the confirmation of the hypothesis, or to the ruling out of the hypothesis. The scientific method requires that an hypothesis be ruled out or modified if its predictions are clearly and repeatedly incompatible with experimental tests. Further, no matter how elegant a theory is, its predictions must agree with experimental results if we are to believe that it is a valid description of nature. In physics, as in every experimental science, "experiment is supreme" and experimental verification of hypothetical predictions is absolutely necessary. Experiments may test the theory directly (for example, the observation of a new particle) or may test for consequences derived from the theory using mathematics and logic (the rate of a radioactive decay process requiring the existence of the new particle). Note that the necessity of experiment also implies that a theory must be testable. Theories which cannot be tested, because, for instance, they have no observable ramifications (such as, a particle whose characteristics make it unobservable), do not qualify as scientific theories.

If the predictions of a long-standing theory are found to be in disagreement with new experimental results, the theory may be discarded as a description of reality, but it may continue to be applicable within a limited range of measurable parameters. For example, the laws of classical mechanics (Newton's Laws) are valid only when the velocities of interest are much smaller than the speed of light (that is, in algebraic form, when v/c <<>> 10^-8 m). A description which is valid at all length scales is given by the equations of quantum mechanics.

[Introduction to the Scientific Method, http://teacher.nsrl.rochester.edu/phy_labs/AppendixE/AppendixE.html ]

This is a scientific method common to physics, where hypotheses leads experimentation - designed to confirm hypotheses. However, they do allow for experimental "failure" where an experiment fails to show the hypotheses. The problem, is that bias (that favors the hypothesis) often creeps in to experiment limiting the value of the experiment as the validation of hypothesis. The result historically, scientific advancement has come in the face of scientific ignorance. Data that was labeled a erroneous and discarded, showed the way to a new understanding. The result, over history has been, the random walk is the primary method of science and knowledge.

The random walk was developed as a concept for the probability. It views the collection of data, as a random walk, with no absolute path, just a probability or trend. The example of which would be the collection of climate data, which todate fair exceeds the abilities of the best models to predict. However, I've found an analogy to the random walk - the puzzle (1500 pieces or more). These very large puzzles are fair more difficult to construct than the smaller puzzles, and the random walk effect occurs with this large of a task. The random walk is represent by organizing the pieces of the puzzle so you can begin a process of trial and error to determine which pieces fit. In this, there is no way to predict where in the puzzle you'll begin or what section of the puzzle will come together first. Ironically, this same method can be applied to science, as shown in the last few articles. Here, in science pieces are not provided, but have to be found, examined and the assembled into a picture. This is the basics of the new random walk method.