Ascientist hypothesized that oxygen atoms from both carbon dioxide and water are used to make glucose during photosynthesis. however, experimental results using oxygen isotopes showed that all of the oxygen from the water ended up in the oxygen molecules that were produced. none of the oxygen from water was found in glucose.. what should the scientist do to best gain scientific understanding of this topic? .
a) analyze what could have happened, and change the experimental methods to retest the hypotheses in a different way..
b) discard the faulty results that do not support the original hypothesis, and repeat the experiment using the same methods..
c) analyze the procedural errors that took place in the experiment, and summarize these in a conclusion statement..
d) repeat the experiment and adjust new data to support the original hypothesis.

Whenever there is contradiction between hypothesis and actual experimental results we have to verify the results again. This could be done by analysing what could have happened, and change the experimental methods to retest the hypotheses in a different way.

The answer is: A) Analyze what could have happened, and change the experimental methods to retest the hypotheses in a different way.

Explanation:

Since the scientist at the end of the study did not obtain the desired results, the first thing to do is analyze what has happened, and continue to experiment differently, since if you continue doing it by the same means, the results will be the same at first, and therefore will not achieve the expected result.

The answer is: A) Analyze what could have happened, and change the experimental methods to retest the hypotheses in a different way.

it’s previous models   because when i picked that son of a gun’s answer it was wrong look for previous models because they might make it a different letter