Quote:
Originally Posted by Kacz42
My thought was to send them some people and talk about results. Maybe why or how they.
|
Let's take stock of where are here. You have a product, Rocket Tabs, and you hypothesize that these tabs reduce the wheel drag of a car, and you (belatedly) posted a test confirming this. But I don't think you realize that there is significant reason to doubt your results.
The first is the order in which you did things. Scientists hypothesize all the time, then test those hypotheses, observe the results, identify possible sources of error, revise their experiments and test again. You had a hypothesis, then created a product and made a website offering them for sale,
then posted a video of
a test after people here expressed their disbelief. If you did not test these until that far into the process, what made you confident enough to create a website and offer them for sale? Now, any testing you do is immediately suspect because you aren't performing it in the pursuit of scientific truth, but to support your business model, with catastrophic results to your business if your testing shows anything other than a result you expected.
Second, you seem unaware of some important parts of the scientific process. I'm taking a college chemistry course right now, and the first week was spent entirely on the scientific process--observations, laws, hypotheses, experimentation, theories. An important part of the scientific process is analysis of results--identification of measurement errors, procedural inaccuracy, unaccounted-for variables. We have to do 14 labs in this chemistry course, and for every lab write-up we must compare results with the rest of the class, identify sources of error in our results or others', and identify ways to improve our experiments were we to run them again. In the real world, this is even more important! Since you are investigating a phenomenon (well, you would be simply investigating it if you didn't already have a vested interest in seeing your business succeed) out in the real world, hoping to profit off of it, your process had better be bulletproof. And I'm sorry to say, it isn't.
That process has some
significant sources of error. I'll wrap up by asking you to consider these questions, to hopefully get you thinking about them: What variables could have skewed your results? How did you control for these variables? Do you think others could reproduce your results exactly? Why or why not?
If you're really interested in a discussion of these devices, let's start with the answers to those questions.