An experiment is the empirical test performed to check or reject a hypothesis. Spontaneous means that it occurs by itself, without external agents that provoke it. The spontaneous experiment is analyzed by the observer who discovers it. In the history of humanity there have been several spontaneous experiments: 1- The path of the Sun in the sky. 2- The immersion of Arquimedes in the bathtub. 3- The fall of Newton's apple.
What happened to Archimedes and Newton - if those events actually happened at all - were not experiments. They were observations.
provoke is an emotive word some better words would be Agonist/Catalyst check is the wrong word "checking" something has no definition of the nature of the applied rule of assumed or scientific fact. though "fact-checking" is a highly topical politicized emotive as a reductive intellectualism. scientifically "checking" something is equal to analyzing it. an observers perception is neither devoid of fact or filled with scientific absolutes.
Also, if those events did occur, the path of the sun in the sky has no place among them. If the events did occur, they can be joined by thousands of other anecdotes about scientists who were inspired to formulate a theory, or find the solution to a problem, by noticing something in their environment. Only after the idea has formed does the scientist devise experiments to test its validity.
Yes, the sun has traversed the sky lots of times since it was first observed; other people have immersed themselves in bathtubs, even if they didn't have to calculate the amount of gold in a crown, and millions of apples have fallen from their trees, sometimes on people, sometimes on chickens, neither of which were inclined to make a treatise of the experience.
There are phenomena that when an observer studies them become experiments. Other examples of spontaneous experiments are: the eruption of a volcano, the aurora borealis, a hurricane, an earthquake, rain, etc.
I guess it didn't take. Phenomena are observed and studied. Observation is a response to phenomena. Experimentation is a way to test theories regarding phenomena. None of them ever become any of the others.
Since some observer begins to ask about how a phenomenon occurs, it becomes an experiment. For example, Archimedes, Newton and the first ones that used the sundial.
No, it doesn't. It - and by "it" I assume you're still referring to a phenomenon - becomes a subject for investigation. If and when that person formulates a hypothesis - which is a provisional idea of how the phenomenon operates, or how it relates to something else - then the person might - but doesn't necessarily - devise a controlled situation in which to test whether his prediction is correct. That is an experiment. If the experiment is successful, he formulates a theory and devises further experiments to test that theory under various conditions. In no case does the phenomenon itself change into anything else. What did any of these people actually do to make them examples? Good lord! Now we have an invention mixed in, too!
You're confusing "becomes" with "inspires". An observation may be the incentive for somebody to experiment but an experiment requires actively changing variables to produce a new observation, in the hope of explaining the original observation.
I know what you mean (dependent variable and independent variable). In this context, I refer to experiment as the empirical experience that answers a question.
