In using the scientific method, there’s an expectation that the scientists doing the testing should be as unprejudiced and uninfluenced as possible. That can be difficult to do, for a number of reasons!

A large amount of data is collected, based upon gathered observations, leading to the development of a theory to explain what was going on with the experiment, as discussed previously. However, not every theory becomes a universal statement or even then a law of nature. Sometimes there’s withdrawing of findings or new technological developments that lead to revised theories and experiments.

What we know about space, gravity, time has changed a lot since the early theories by the likes of Xeno in Ancient Greece who had puzzling paradoxes about speed and motion — these days we have mathematical formulae and laws and experiments that are able to solve such questions and even give us insight to what the galaxy is like.

We have to consider that scientists are humans too, that there could be discrepancies in results due to human error. One such example was the theory of cold fusion, that a type of nuclear reaction that would occur at, or near, room temperature. While there were some indications that an experiment had demonstrated that it was possible, further testing found that it couldn’t be replicated. When looking at philosophy of science, we have to consider how observations and inductive/deductive approaches influence our findings.