How is that possible? So are these rankings? Ratios? These numbers were constructed somehow, I think that statement is a little too ambiguous

I wonder if all gases can solidify! I looked it up and I suspect the answer is yes

I guess that goes to show how exaggerated and unrealistic our models have to be. If we’d drawn the ratio between orbitals and the nucleus more accurately, we’d completely lose sight of the nucleus

Typo: place

Maybe it takes a certain amount of sunlight to see the effects?

We assumed our tools were accurate at measuring height and perfectly shading the plants. Also that the weather from last summer was the same. Also that the watering between all the plants was consistent. Your results must have been reliable!

I assume the state of the ground and soil could have influenced the height of the plant. Thus, shading will eliminate light from some of plants that share the same soil. The shade should cause the plants to grow shorter

Null hypothesis: the height of our tomato plant is not affected by sunlight. Alternative hypothesis: the height of our tomato plant is affected by sunlight

It does somewhat bother me, how could you say that two patients are one and the same? Even if we try to make their environment as identical as possible, they are still different. Unless we replicate ourselves genetically, this is an impossible statement to make. With that said, I can kinda foresee how statistics can accommodate this problem

The independent variables are factors that we assume can affect blood pressure. We want to keep them consistent so that when we introduce the drug, we can verify if the drug does influences blood pressure. I like to think if y is the change in blood pressure, x is the influence of the drug, and z is the influence of independent variables, then y = x + z where we keep z constant and plug in different scenarios for x to see if y changes. If y remains constant, then it must be true that y = z and we can eliminate x from the equation. note These are not an actual math equation, I made them up to give a better sense to what independent and dependent variables are. Also, = is misleading but I meant to say ‘is changed based on x and z’

I think the null hypothesis states that there is no correlation between two events or attributes. Falsifying this statement (proving that this statement is false) means that the two events are related. Proving whether or not events are related helps us eliminate bias

Wait but what’s a Design Challenge? What are we designing and how is it challenging?

This idea, I heard it from someone in the past: When students are struggling to pay attention in class, you generally assume that the problem is the way the lecture was presented. Actually, what if the class is right before lunch, so everyone is hungry? What if the air conditioning is really low, making them sleepy? The problem is not always as obvious as you might think

Note to the authors, I like how the more advanced vocabulary is further elaborated upon. I didn’t need it now but I know that, eventually, it’ll be incredibly helpful

I think some statements are subjective. When I say “I got a good grade” it could mean anywhere from ‘I got a full score’ to ‘I barely passed the class.’ If the class is exceptionally difficult, maybe you’d use the latter

I am very curious where this is true in a more abstract field like math or computer science. The best I can come up with is “my program is looking for the max value” but that doesn’t feel anthropomorphic enough, that’s literally what is being done

To me, a mental model is like a mind map. It’s a way to organize/structure my thoughts into key ideas and eventually elaborate with pictures, questions, and so on. Without a mental model, I am not building connections with what I knew before. Thus it’s harder to realize the significance of what I hear in class or how it would fit the bigger picture