HURRY PAST DUE THIS IS MY HOMEWORK IN DETIALS! The purpose of this experiment was to find out how the density of a liquid affects its properties and how it interacts with other liquids . The hypothesis stated: The density of a liquid is shown by the object sinking or floating. Therefore, using this information if the object sinks then the object is more dense than the object that floats. When it comes to the density of liquids if the liquid sits on top of the water and does not mix, the liquid is less dense than water. If the liquid sinks into the water and the water sits on top, the liquid is more dense than the water.

Address the hypothesis. Based on the observations, was the hypothesis supported, not supported, or inconclusive?

Based on the observations, the hypothesis was...

Formulating a New Hypothesis

If the initial hypothesis is not supported, you can go back to the drawing board and hypothesize a new answer to the question and a new way to test it. If your hypothesis is supported, you might think of ways to refine your hypothesis and test those.

Failure to support hypotheses is common in science, and often serves as a starting point for new experiments. Go back to the statement of hypothesis in the Introduction. Then review your findings, the data from the experiment. Make a judgment about whether or not the hypothesis has been supported.

It is verified by testing it. If the data supports the hypothesis, then we consider the hypothesis to be verified and true. If however, the data does not support the hypothesis or refutes it, then the hypothesis is in trouble, and we have to come up with a different hypothesis to explain the observations.

Explanation: ... If the data consistently do not support the hypothesis, then CLEARLY, the hypothesis is NOT a reasonable explanation of what you are investigating. The hypothesis is rejected, and we search for a new interpretation, an new hypothesis that supports the experimental data

"1. it should be, it has been for about 20 years, and it's really not much different in the end than breeding animals to have particular traits. there are always concerns about genetically engineered animals/plants affecting the environment in unexpected negative ways, but i can't think of an example where the fears didn't turn out to be baseless.  

first, as you point out, it would be a great advance in pharmacology, to be able to tailor drugs and their doses to me. the pros involve better medical treatment. the cons involve privacy issues like insurance companies denying coverage to people with genetic risk factors. looking at dna markers wouldn't affect the frequency of genetic diseases, but it would allow detection of them earlier. and ok, actually i suppose that if people used this information to avoid having children with genetic diseases, some might decrease in frequency."