• anonymous
When there are parts of an experiment that scientists cannot carefully control, they should A. change their hypothesis to include all the variables. B. ignore the other variables and record only the important data. C. redesign the experiment to be sure they are testing only one variable. D. try to set up a new experiment that tests a few variables at once.
  • Stacey Warren - Expert
Hey! We 've verified this expert answer for you, click below to unlock the details :)
At vero eos et accusamus et iusto odio dignissimos ducimus qui blanditiis praesentium voluptatum deleniti atque corrupti quos dolores et quas molestias excepturi sint occaecati cupiditate non provident, similique sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollitia animi, id est laborum et dolorum fuga. Et harum quidem rerum facilis est et expedita distinctio. Nam libero tempore, cum soluta nobis est eligendi optio cumque nihil impedit quo minus id quod maxime placeat facere possimus, omnis voluptas assumenda est, omnis dolor repellendus. Itaque earum rerum hic tenetur a sapiente delectus, ut aut reiciendis voluptatibus maiores alias consequatur aut perferendis doloribus asperiores repellat.
  • jamiebookeater
I got my questions answered at in under 10 minutes. Go to now for free help!
  • anonymous
To me the correct answer is C. Even if you don't manage to properly define all the variables, you can trace the changes that occur during the experiments and express those as a constant. Then you can adapt the experiments, or perhaps change them, to eventually acquire a complete definition of all the variables. Science history is full of such examples: at first some experiment managed to describe a certain phenomenon in large terms, leaving behind some constants which have been given a better explanation only with further studies. Think of the difference between the macroscopical and the microscopical gas laws.

Looking for something else?

Not the answer you are looking for? Search for more explanations.