Can I read example statements for undergraduate students?

Astronomy: Consider the following astronomical statements. Classify each statement as either an observation, m?

• Consider the following astronomical statements. Classify each statement as either an OBSERVATION, meaning something we have directly observed or measured, or an EXPLANATION, meaning something that we infer from observational or experimental evidence even though we cannot observe it directly. 1. Stars can shine brightly for billions of years. (OBSERVATION/EXPLANATION) 2. The universe expanding because it began with a Big Bang. (OBSERVATION/EXPLANATION) 3. The orderly orbits of planets arose from their formation in a rotating gas cloud. (OBSERVATION/EXPLANATION) 4. Stars shine with ENERGY generated by nuclear fusion in their cores. (OBSERVATION/EXPLANATION) 5. The Andromeda Galaxy is similar in structure to our own Milky Way. (OBSERVATION/EXPLANATION) 6. All planets orbit the Sun in the same direction and nearly the same plane. (OBSERVATION/EXPLANATION) 7. The Andromeda and Milky Way galaxies formed in the same way. (OBSERVATION/EXPLANATION) 8. More distant galaxies are moving away form us faster than nearby galaxies. (OBSERVATION/EXPLANATION) Hint 1. Andromeda Galaxy example of an observation: Observations are things that we can directly see or measure. In that sense, observations are “facts” that can be wrong only if the observer made a mistake when conducting the observation (or, in rarer cases, if the observer is lying about what he or she observed). For example, if an astronomer says that “the Andromeda Galaxy is 2.5 million light-years away,” then we can assume this claim is based on an actual measurement made by some established technique of distance measurement. This statement is therefore an “observation” that must be true unless the astronomer applied the distance measurement technique incorrectly or there is some unknown problem with the technique itself. Hint 2. Andromeda Galaxy example of an explanation: Explanations provide possible reasons for what we measure or observe. Explanations are not necessarily correct: Some explanations may be little more than guesses, while others may be based on well-verified scientific principles. Not all explanations can be verified. In general, explanations are not things that we can directly observe, but rather are things that we infer from observations. For example, if we say that "the Andromeda Galaxy was born from the collapse of a giant cloud of gas," this is clearly something we must infer, because we cannot observe what the galaxy looked like before it was born. Hint 3. Can we “observe” or measure something older than we are? It is possible to measure ages for things much older than we are. For example, you can use tree rings to measure the ages of trees that have been alive for hundreds or thousands of years. Similarly, scientists have developed techniques that allow them to measure the ages of our solar system and of other stars. These measurements are considered “observations” because they are things that anyone can in principle observe (measure) for themselves. Hint 4. How can we know what occurs within the interiors of stars? For example, although we cannot directly observe fusion inside stars, we are confident that it occurs because we are confident in the laws of physics and because the assumption that fusion occurs explains many observations, including the observed fact that stars can shine for very long times. (And for those students who have read ahead in the textbook, the assumption of fusion also explains observations of neutrinos from the Sun.) Hint 5. What is the Big Bang? Scientists claim that the universe began with the Big Bang because the Big Bang theory explains many features of the universe, including the fact that the entire universe is expanding

• Answer:

  If I were in your Astro class, I would be arguing against the so-called hints. Every single statement you listed demands a huge amount of inference, even #6, which APPEARS to be an observation... the only reason it appears that way is that the scientific consensus has developed around a heliocentric solar system. "We are confident in the laws of physics" ??? - if so, then they are all "observations" from somebody's point of view. In my opinion, this distinction is total b***s***. "established technique" defines the difference? What a crock. Sorry to rant.