Andreas Cellarius hypothesis, demonstrating the planetary motions in eccentric and epicyclical orbits

A hypothesis (from Greek ὑπόθεσις; plural hypotheses) is a proposed explanation for a phenomenon. The term derives from the Greek, ὑποτιθέναι – hypotithenai meaning "to put under" or "to suppose".^[1] For a hypothesis to be put forward as a scientific hypothesis, the scientific method requires that one can test it. Scientists generally base scientific hypotheses on previous observations that cannot satisfactorily be explained with the available scientific theories. Even though the words "hypothesis" and "theory" are often used synonymously, a scientific hypothesis is not the same as a scientific theory. A working hypothesis is a provisionally accepted hypothesis proposed for further research.^[1]

In a related but distinguishable usage, the term hypothesis is used in formal logic for the antecedent of a proposition; thus in the proposition "If P, then Q", P denotes the hypothesis (or antecedent); Q can be called a consequent. P is the assumption in a (possibly counterfactual) What If question.

The adjective hypothetical, meaning "having the nature of a hypothesis", or "being assumed to exist as an immediate consequence of a hypothesis", can refer to any of these meanings of the term "hypothesis".

Uses[link]

In its ancient usage, hypothesis also refers to a summary of the plot of a classical drama.

In Plato's Meno (86e–87b), Socrates dissects virtue with a method used by mathematicians,^[2] that of "investigating from a hypothesis."^[3] In this sense, 'hypothesis' refers to a clever idea or to a convenient mathematical approach that simplifies cumbersome calculations.^[4] Cardinal Bellarmine gave a famous example of this usage in the warning issued to Galileo in the early 17th century: that he must not treat the motion of the Earth as a reality, but merely as a hypothesis.^[5]

In common usage in the 21st century, a hypothesis refers to a provisional idea whose merit requires evaluation. For proper evaluation, the framer of a hypothesis needs to define specifics in operational terms. A hypothesis requires more work by the researcher in order to either confirm or disprove it. In due course, a confirmed hypothesis may become part of a theory or occasionally may grow to become a theory itself. Normally, scientific hypotheses have the form of a mathematical model.^[6] Sometimes, but not always, one can also formulate them as existential statements, stating that some particular instance of the phenomenon under examination has some characteristic and causal explanations, which have the general form of universal statements, stating that every instance of the phenomenon has a particular characteristic.

Any useful hypothesis will enable predictions by reasoning (including deductive reasoning). It might predict the outcome of an experiment in a laboratory setting or the observation of a phenomenon in nature. The prediction may also invoke statistics and only talk about probabilities. Karl Popper, following others, has argued that a hypothesis must be falsifiable, and that one cannot regard a proposition or theory as scientific if it does not admit the possibility of being shown false. Other philosophers of science have rejected the criterion of falsifiability or supplemented it with other criteria, such as verifiability (e.g., verificationism) or coherence (e.g., confirmation holism). The scientific method involves experimentation on the basis of hypotheses to answer questions and explore observations.

In framing a hypothesis, the investigator must not currently know the outcome of a test or that it remains reasonably under continuing investigation. Only in such cases does the experiment, test or study potentially increase the probability of showing the truth of a hypothesis. If the researcher already knows the outcome, it counts as a "consequence" — and the researcher should have already considered this while formulating the hypothesis. If one cannot assess the predictions by observation or by experience, the hypothesis classes as not yet useful, and must wait for others who might come afterward to make possible the needed observations. For example, a new technology or theory might make the necessary experiments feasible.

Scientific hypothesis[link]

People refer to a trial solution to a problem as a hypothesis, often called an "educated guess"^[7][8] because it provides a suggested solution based on the evidence. Experimenters may test and reject several hypotheses before solving the problem.

According to Schick and Vaughn,^[9] researchers weighing up alternative hypotheses may take into consideration:

• Testability (compare falsifiability as discussed above)
• Parsimony (as in the application of "Occam's razor", discouraging the postulation of excessive numbers of entities)
• Scope – the apparent application of the hypothesis to multiple cases of phenomena
• Fruitfulness – the prospect that a hypothesis may explain further phenomena in the future
• Conservatism – the degree of "fit" with existing recognized knowledge-systems.

Working hypothesis[link]

A 'working hypothesis' is a hypothesis that is provisionally accepted as a basis for further research^[10] in the hope that a tenable theory will be produced, even if the hypothesis ultimately fails.^[11] Like all hypotheses, a working hypothesis is constructed as a statement of expectations, which can be linked to the exploratory research purpose in empirical investigation and are often used as a conceptual framework in qualitative research.^[12][13]

In recent years, philosophers of science have tried to integrate the various approaches to evaluating hypotheses, and the scientific method in general, to form a more complete system that integrates the individual concerns of each approach. Notably, Imre Lakatos and Paul Feyerabend, Karl Popper's colleague and student, respectively, have produced novel attempts at such a synthesis.

Hypotheses, concepts and measurement[link]

Concepts, as abstract units of meaning, play a key role in the development and testing of hypotheses. Concepts are the basic components of hypotheses. Most formal hypotheses connect concepts by specifying the expected relationships between concepts. For example, a simple relational hypothesis such as "education increases income" specifies a positive relationship between the concepts "education" and "income." This abstract or conceptual hypothesis cannot be tested. First, it must be operationalized or situated in the real world by rules of interpretation. Consider again the simple hypothesis "Education increases Income." To test the hypothesis the abstract meaning of education and income must be derived or operationalized. The concepts should be measured. Education could be measured by "years of school completed" or "highest degree completed" etc. Income could be measured by "hourly rate of pay" or "yearly salary" etc.

When a set of hypotheses are grouped together they become a type of conceptual framework. When a conceptual framework is complex and incorporates causality or explanation it is generally referred to as a theory. According to noted philosopher of science Carl Gustav Hempel "An adequate empirical interpretation turns a theoretical system into a testable theory: The hypothesis whose constituent terms have been interpreted become capable of test by reference to observable phenomena. Frequently the interpreted hypothesis will be derivative hypotheses of the theory; but their confirmation or disconfirmation by empirical data will then immediately strengthen or weaken also the primitive hypotheses from which they were derived."^[14]

Hempel provides a useful metaphor that describes the relationship between a conceptual framework and the framework as it is observed and perhaps tested (interpreted framework). "The whole system floats, as it were, above the plane of observation and is anchored to it by rules of interpretation. These might be viewed as strings which are not part of the network but link certain points of the latter with specific places in the plane of observation. By virtue of those interpretative connections, the network can function as a scientific theory"^[15] Hypotheses with concepts anchored in the plane of observation are ready to be tested. In "actual scientific practice the process of framing a theoretical structure and of interpreting it are not always sharply separated, since the intended interpretation usually guides the construction of the theoretician."^[16] It is, however, "possible and indeed desirable, for the purposes of logical clarification, to separate the two steps conceptually."^[16]

Statistical hypothesis testing[link]

When a possible correlation or similar relation between phenomena is investigated, such as, for example, whether a proposed remedy is effective in treating a disease, that is, at least to some extent and for some patients, the hypothesis that a relation exists cannot be examined the same way one might examine a proposed new law of nature: in such an investigation a few cases in which the tested remedy shows no effect do not falsify the hypothesis. Instead, statistical tests are used to determine how likely it is that the overall effect would be observed if no real relation as hypothesized exists. If that likelihood is sufficiently small (e.g., less than 1%), the existence of a relation may be assumed. Otherwise, any observed effect may as well be due to pure chance.

In statistical hypothesis testing two hypotheses are compared, which are called the null hypothesis and the alternative hypothesis. The null hypothesis is the hypothesis that states that there is no relation between the phenomena whose relation is under investigation, or at least not of the form given by the alternative hypothesis. The alternative hypothesis, as the name suggests, is the alternative to the null hypothesis: it states that there is some kind of relation. The alternative hypothesis may take several forms, depending on the nature of the hypothesized relation; in particular, it can be two-sided (for example: there is some effect, in a yet unknown direction) or one-sided (the direction of the hypothesized relation, positive or negative, is fixed in advance).

Conventional significance levels for testing the hypotheses are .10, .05, and .01. Whether the null hypothesis is rejected and the alternative hypothesis is accepted, all must be determined in advance, before the observations are collected or inspected. If these criteria are determined later, when the data to be tested is already known, the test is invalid.^[17]

It is important to mention that the above procedure is actually dependent on the number of the participants (units or sample size) that is included in the study. For instance, the sample size may be too small to reject a null hypothesis and, therefore, is recommended to specify the sample size from the beginning. It is advisable to define a small, medium and large effect size for each of a number of the important statistical tests which are used to test the hypotheses.

See also[link]

Wikiversity has learning materials about Hypothesis

Look up hypothesis in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.

• Axiom
• Case study
• Conceptual framework
• Confirmation holism
• Conjecture
• Ecological fallacy
• Empiricism
• Explanandum
• Hypothesis Theory, a research area in Cognitive Psychology
• Learning
• Logic
• Logical Positivism
• Operationalization
• Philosophiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica for Newton's position on hypotheses
• Reductionism
• Research design
• Scientific method
• Sociology of scientific knowledge
• Theorem
• Theory
• Thought experiment
• Working hypothesis

References[link]

A major contributor to this article appears to have a close connection with its subject. It may require cleanup to comply with Wikipedia's content policies, particularly neutral point of view. Please discuss further on the talk page. (April 2012)

This article or section reads like a news release, or is otherwise written in an overly promotional tone. Please help by either rewriting this article from a neutral point of view or by moving this article to Wikinews. When appropriate, blatant advertising may be marked for speedy deletion with {{db-spam}}. (April 2012)

Steve Blank is a Silicon Valley-based retired serial entrepreneur, founding and/or part of 8 startup companies in California’s Silicon Valley. A prolific educator, thought leader and writer on Customer Development for Startups, Blank teaches, refines, writes and blogs on “Customer Development,” a rigorous methodology he developed to bring the “scientific method” to the typically chaotic, seemingly disorganized startup process.^[1]

Now teaching Entrepreneurship at three major Universities and the National Science Foundation Innovation Corps (I-Corps), Blank co-founded his first of eight startups after several years repairing fighter plane electronics in Thailand during the Vietnam War, followed by several years of defense electronics work for U.S. intelligence agencies in “undisclosed locations.”

Blank's first book, "The Four Steps to the Epiphany," detailed the Customer Development process and remains required reading among entrepreneurs, investors, and established companies alike, when the focus is optimizing a startup’s chances for scalability and success. Blank views entrepreneurship as a practice that can be managed rather than purely an art form to be experienced.^[2]

"The Startup Owner’s Manual" was Blank's second book and is a step-by-step guide to building a successful startup, offering practical advice for any startup founder, entrepreneur, investor or educator.

His Customer Development methodology launched the lean startup movement. It is rooted on startups "getting out of the building," talking to customers and using that feedback to develop and refine their product.

Business career[link]

Subsequent to dropping out of the University of Michigan, Steve Blank arrived in Silicon Valley in 1978, as boom times began. His early startups include two semiconductor companies, Zilog and MIPS Computers (now MIPS Technologies); Convergent Technologies; a consulting stint for Pixar; a supercomputer firm, Ardent Computer; peripheral supplier, SuperMac Technologies; a military intelligence systems supplier, ESL; Rocket Science Games.^[3] Steve co-founded startup number eight, E.piphany, in his living room in 1996. After retiring from E.piphany the day before its IPO in September 1999, Blank served on two public boards (Macrovision and Immersion) and several private companies. He continues to selectively invest and advise Silicon Valley startups such as Votizen.

Teaching[link]

After 21 years driving 8 high technology startups, today Steve teaches entrepreneurship to both undergraduate and graduate students at the University of California, Berkeley's Haas School of Business,^[4] Stanford University Graduate School of Engineering,^[5] and a joint MBA class with Berkeley Haas and Columbia Business School.^[6] His “Customer Development” teaching and writing coalesce and codify his experiences and observations of entrepreneurs in action, including his own and those he advises.

In 2009, he earned the Stanford University Undergraduate Teaching Award in Management Science and Engineering. The same year, The San Jose Mercury News listed him as one of the 10 Influencers in Silicon Valley.^[7] In 2010, he was earned the Earl F. Cheit Outstanding Teaching Award at U.C. Berkeley Haas School of Business.^[8]

In January 2011, he launched a new class at Stanford University, The Lean LaunchPad.^[9] It teaches aspiring entrepreneurs all aspects of building a business, including business model design, customer and agile development, and design thinking.^[10] In July 2011, the National Science Foundation adopted the Lean Launchpad as the curriculum for its Innovation-Corps, an incubator for 100 science and engineering teams each year.^[11]

In May 2011, Blank was the commencement speaker at Philadelphia University ^[12]

In 2012, The Harvard Business Review named Blank one of 12 Masters of Innovation in recognition of his work in bringing the “greatest clarity to the field of innovation.”^[13]

Blank has collected an informal history of Silicon Valley, which was presented as a Google TechTalk and a talk at the Computer History Museum called The Secret History of Silicon Valley.^[14][15][16]

Public service[link]

Blank is the past Chairman of Audubon California.^[17] And has been on the board of Peninsula Open Space Trust (POST).^[18] And was a trustee of U.C. Santa Cruz. Blank is currently on the board of the California League of Conservation Voters (CLCV). In 2007 he was appointed to the California Coastal Commission.^[19][20] He has made major gifts to preserve the California Coast, including funding the visitors center at Año Nuevo State Reserve.^[21][22][23]

Books[link]

Blank, Steve (2012). The Startup Owner's Manual. K&S Ranch Press. ISBN 0984999302. 

Blank, Steven Gary. Four Steps to the Epiphany. K&S Ranch Press. 

Blank, Steven Gary. Not All Those Who Wander Are Lost. CafePress.com. 

References[link]

External links[link]

• Steven Gary Blank's blog
• Steve Blank Coastal Commissioner
• Steve Blank Stanford Lecturer
• Steve Blank Haas Lecturer
• Steve Blank's "Secret History of Silicon Valley"
• Steve Blank speaking at Stanford University
• Steve Blank's Customer Development podcast

Alex Collier is an alias of US citizen Ralph Amigron (who has also used Ralph Amagran). As "Collier," he claimed to be a contactee. He alleged that he has been in contact with inhabitants of the Andromeda constellation^[1] and purported to have messages to relay from these supposed visitors. "Collier's" Andromedans are of the Nordic aliens type, leaning toward the New Age "space brothers" subtype. Collier's statements include an elaborate "history" of the earth from his aliens' point of view. This secret history has elements of many other conspiracy theory and UFOlogy traditions, including Nibiru, Reptilians, grey aliens, colonizations of Earth by multiple extraterrestrial species, Lemuria, and Atlantis. Statements were made by "Collier" that he has been forced into obscurity due to threats made by "three well dressed men" who were allegedly part of a "Program".^[2] No corroboration has been made of any of these claims, either of being a "contactee" or of having been threatened into silence by any government organization. He has been openly accused by members of the UFOlogy community of having merely perpetrated a hoax.^[3]

See also[link]

• Contactee
• UFOlogy

References[link]