IMNH & ImaH: Exploring complex scientific theories

IMNH (I’m a New Hypothesis) and it’s meaning and sometimes also called ImaH (I’m a Hypothesis).

Code for IMNH

<span style="color: #ff6600;">IMNH</span>

In formal education made fun of people who invented new theories // but Astronomy forces you to face the truth, we don’t really know everything about our universe // we can and should make up new hypothesis // it’s simply an other way of learning about the place we live in #semi-poem #semi-haiku

Theory is used by most people as if it is the same as the more less used word hypohesis // but the technical community does not accept common use, it accepts correct use // however there is a grey area, a time of learning #semi-poem #semi-haiku

The online lectures and tutorials; books that you purchase or loan; and videos about a subject are all part of the learning process, but it’s possible that you might not get very complex ideas and concepts right the first time. IMNH is a chance to make up a hypothesis of what you think are the ideas and concepts that are presented to you—over time you can shift this IMNH hypothesis closer to the actual ideas and concepts that are presented to you.

Often the gap between a IMNH hypothesis and the actual ideas and concepts are closed by finding your IMNH hypothesis makes specific predictions that are not consistent with the actual ideas or concepts for that particular specific case.

Sometimes by making a IMNH hypothesis it is possible to ask questions that are not answered by the current idea or concept, and the answer might be found at some future date. In this case the gap between the IMNH hypothesis and actual ideas and concepts can not be closed.

What is Theory?

This section was originally called IMNT and stood for I’m a New Theory, but there seems to be some fine line between several factors of what a hypothesis and theory is when used in a technical way. Firstly it seems that if you are in management, economics, politics and even psychology the rules for what is theory is relaxed and possibly redefined–more on this below. Incidentally, these fields use the word science, but are not considered true science because the “scientific evidence” they are based on is not easily observable and testable.

If you make a theory for what is considered science, they are generally fields that are easily observed and have repeatable results. Such scientific fields are often called natural and physical science.

I’m Ready (Acoustic) – @Holly_Drummond

Shortened link: @Holly_Drummond — I’m Ready [song/music]: https://youtu.be/e-JvGyxO1qw

Jar Of Hearts – Christina Perri (Cover By @Holly_Drummond)

Shortened link: ♬ Jar Of Hearts [song/music]: http://bit.ly/kTuw9C, http://pear.ly/bq2QT, @Holly_Drummond

You can check out more of this ladies music from the following places:

I like to expand on theory and even make new hypothesis..”A distinction is sometimes made in science between theories and hypotheses, which are theories that are not considered to have been satisfactorily tested or proven.[1]”

A theorem is derived from a theory and is applied to a practical or real problem[1].

Economics: “Mainstream economic theory relies upon a priori quantitative economic models, which employ a variety of concepts. Theory typically proceeds with an assumption of ceteris paribus, which means holding constant explanatory variables other than the one under consideration. When creating theories, the objective is to find ones which are at least as simple in information requirements, more precise in predictions, and more fruitful in generating additional research than prior theories.[2]”

“A political theory is an ethical theory about the law and government. Often the term ‘political theory’ refers to a general view, or specific ethic, political belief or attitude, about politics.[1]”

“Theory has also been applied to management. This is often referred to as the science of management and attempt (like economic and possibly political theories) to apply scientific principals to the problems faced by this field” [3]

“The term theoretical is sometimes informally used in place of hypothetical to describe a result that is predicted, but has not yet been adequately tested by observation or experiment.[1]”

The problem is that you (and even expert scientists) don’t know when I’m doing it. Worse, you might think that this is part of the theory or article I’m discussing. The question is: “How do I find a way to tell you I’m expanding on the theory or making a new Hypothesis?” This is in fact a problem of accurately referencing the source of the material I am talking about!

While I would like to think I can expand on theory or make new hypothesis, often such obvious paths have already been explored by others (and much more thoroughly than me) and thus I can attach or improve on my expansions and new hypothesis by referencing someone else’s existing work or in some cases work that will be invented some time in the future (like in the year 2000 I asked: could black holes have survived the early stages of the big bang? The theory then was that the big bang had matter distributed in a uniform way and any mini-black holes would have evaporated–but there was no such thing back then as dark matter or the knowledge that the matter in the big bang was not distributed uniformly).

Recently I was checking out videos on string & M-theory. I started to make connections with CERN and the search for the Higgs particle and how strings and M-theory might relate to this search. To do that I had to move away from what the videos and information said.

I can’t easily reference what I generate from my own mind. I don’t only “expand on material’ but I generate my own theories–that are called Hypothesis because they might not have been fully developed from supporting background theories, ideas, models and concepts.

However I recognize, you can not necessarily know when I am expanding on the material or inventing new material–in this case material relates to Hypothesis.

Just how much effort I go to make sure that such expansions on theories or new theories take a solid shape and are backed up by lots of evidence (if that is possible) depends on how interesting the theory, concept or idea is to me.

To achieve the task of letting you know when I expand on theories or make new theories I had to resort to the urban dictionary; In it, I found the text: “IMNT.”

ImaH stand for I’m A Hypothesis . It seems perfect to say that is related to what I’m talking about yet not from the reference.

<strong style="color: #ff6600;">ImaH</strong>

IMNH also relates to I’m a new hypothesis to me so it contains the best of both worlds (IMNH: This definition is generated from me, it is not from the urban dictionary–yet). 🙂

<strong style="color: #ff6600;">IMNH</strong>

——————————————–

NOTES

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory, [accessed 1 April 2011].

[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_theory#Theory, [accessed 1 April 2011].

[3] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_Management, [accessed may 2011]

[4] Formal Science: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formal_science

[5] Scientific Method: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method

[6] Science: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science

☆☆☆

Shortened Link to this Article: ☆ IMNH (I’m a New Hypothesis) or ImaH abbreviation: http://bit.ly/b7EHAu

~~~

End of Article

~~~

Advertisements
This entry was posted in News and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to IMNH & ImaH: Exploring complex scientific theories

  1. Pingback: Quark Star (update) | Gharr

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s