Allen is creating a hypothesis for a science experiment. He has written, "Soil does not contain enough copper." Why does this hypothesis need to be improved?

This is a scientific theory, not a hypothesis.

It is not an educated guess.

It is not based on a problem or observation.

It is not testable or falsifiable.

1 answer

The correct reason why Allen's hypothesis needs to be improved is: It is not testable or falsifiable.

A good scientific hypothesis should make a specific prediction that can be tested through experimentation. In its current form, Allen's statement does not provide a way to measure or test the claim about copper levels in soil, making it difficult to validate or disprove. A more effective hypothesis would clearly outline what is being measured or observed in relation to copper in soil.