Hypotheses


 * WOW [[image:girl_with_cat_precious.gif width="75" height="136"]]**** 5pts **


 * I. Hypotheses**

When hypothesizing you are giving a possible solution to a problem or situation. Please visit the following link so that you can learn how to write hypotheses and when to use them. [|http://www.accessexcellence.org/LC/TL/filson/writhypo.php]


 * As you could see in the link above, hypotheses are written using modal verbs, like may, could, should. would, and if conditional structures. They can also be written using expresions (__key words__) as probably, possibly, and verbs such as: think, assume, hypothesize, imagine, suppose, guess, believe, among others. When reading a text, the indicators of hypotheses are the previously mentioned grammatical structures and key words. **


 * Read the following information extracted from the web page**: [] on Dec 27th, 2008
 * Hypotheses and mathematics**

So where does mathematics enter into this picture? In many ways, both obvious and subtle: Very often, the situation under analysis will appear to be complicated and unclear. Part of the mathematics of the task will be to impose a clear structure on the problem. The clarity of thought required will actively be developed through more abstract mathematical study. Those without sufficient general mathematical skill will be unable to perform an appropriate logical analysis. (Taken from [] on Dec 27th, 2008)
 * A good hypothesis needs to be clear, precisely stated and testable in some way. Creation of these clear hypotheses requires clear general mathematical thinking.
 * The data from experiments must be carefully analysed in relation to the original hypothesis. This requires the data to be structured, operated upon, prepared and displayed in appropriate ways. The levels of this process can range from simple to exceedingly complex.

There is often confusion between the ideas surrounding proof, which is mathematics, and making and testing an experimental hypothesis, which is science. The difference is rather simple: Of course, to be good at science, you need to be good at deductive reasoning, although experts at deductive reasoning need not be mathematicians. Detectives, such as Sherlock Holmes and Hercule Poirot, are such experts: they collect evidence from a crime scene and then draw logical conclusions from the evidence to support the hypothesis that, for example, Person M. committed the crime. They use this evidence to create sufficiently compelling deductions to support their hypotheses //beyond reasonable doubt//. The key word here is 'reasonable'. There is always the possibility of creating an exceedingly outlandish scenario to explain away any hypothesis of a detective or prosecution lawyer, but judges and juries in courts eventually make the decision that the probability of such eventualities are 'small' and the chance of the hypothesis being correct 'high'. (Taken from [] on Dec 27th, 2008)
 * Using deductive reasoning in hypothesis testing**
 * Mathematics is based on //deductive reasoning// : a proof is a logical deduction from a set of clear inputs.
 * Science is based on //inductive reasoning// : hypotheses are strengthened or rejected based on an accumulation of experimental evidence.

**II. Assignment** 1. Check the following links and explain what deductive reasoning is and inductive reasoning is. [] []

  Deductive reasoning is one in which there are two or more logical assumption, from which emerges __a conclusion__   ** this should be before the verb **  , this conclusion may be true or false. It is true when both hypotheses are true and false when at least one of the hypotheses is false.

Inductive reasoning is that given ** to **  the particular facts and comes from them, to a general conclusion. Some are strong and weak, __strong given its particular facts and the conclusion contains the same without being changed__ ** ouch... kind of confusing ** , however, the weak  ** ones **  can take in the __other meanings conlusion less accurate because it is not as accurate in the facts__. ** ?? ** ​ 2. Please visit the following page and read the text **"Geometrical proportions of the Egyptian Pyramids"** then find and extract the hypotheses in it. There are 6 hypotheses in the text extract 5 and explain how you found them. Geometrical proportions of the Egyptian Pyramids.doc

Many researchers of the Pyramid of Cheops __assume__, that to builders (architects) of the Egyptian Pyramids knew the number of golden section and number "Pi" ops= Ops

__Probably__, the concrete ratio of diameters of a living circle in the geometrical drawing of the Cheops' pyramid has other sizes about which I can not tell anything certain as more exact calculations are necessary for this purpose.

It is __possible__ to __assume__, that the ratio of diameters of a living circle in the geometrical drawing of the Cheops' pyramid turns out as a result of transformation of the living circle when size of the line TA is precisely equal to size of lines CE, DF, LJ, MK.

It is __possible__ to speak that magnitudes of the Egyptian Pyramids have fixed sizes of measurements which allow to understand structure of world around, and allow to apply "Great Egyptian Measures" to designing environmental space and for an arrangement of the objects of the human world created by people.

//If exact geometrical calculations are not required, then it is __possible__ to count that approximately the cubit is equal to the side of a correct diheptagon which is entered within the framework of a correct circle.//

 --> I recognized the hypothesis of the text because they use modal verbs and because they have five, as are the key words that are underlined ** super ** 3. Look for any mathematical hypothesis and put it in your wiki. Please make sure you cite the source properly so that you do not commit plagiarism. Explain whether the hypothesis you are explaining is deductive or inductive and give reasons to your explanation.

The first working hypothesis proposed in this thesis is as follows: Hypothesis 1:There is a gap between mathematics and real life Academic math. Secondly, this raises another working hypothesis: Hypothesis 2: The distance between "real life math" and "Academic math" generates negative attitudes that hinder the learning of mathematics. The third working hypothesis is as follows: Hypothesis 3: People using learning styles based on dialogue equal to learn the mathematical concept of proportion.

So we think that adults use different strategies based egalitarian dialogue in learning to solve mathematical problems. We assume in principle that all people have mathematical ** s ** kills and that we practice ** them ** in our daily lives. These "math real life "are different than those studied in school. Therefore our first hypothesis is that there is a gap between mathematics and real life academic mathematics ** Which ** manifests itself in different ways. Usually adults identify as "mathematics" those operations we learn in school, but not so with those everyday activities, despite clearly having a mathematical background, are not identified as such. This aspect leads us to propose a second hypothesis: the distance between "real life math" and "__Mathematics academic__ ** academic mathematics ** "is what generates negative attitudes that hinder learning the concepts of proportion and calculation.

SOURCE: []

 --> Hypotheses are, in general, deductive reasoning as they can be both true facts and the conclusion be true or enough for one person any of the facts is false to the false conclusion also. ** I really liked this part... and you are totally right in my modest opinion. **