Science

Since engineering is the corner stone of analysis, for the most part, most quality analysis is conceived and executed in this domain. What’s lacking within the engineering domain is the desire to look beyond what has been done before. Fortunately we have science.  The scientific method lies at the heart of discovery and is so important it is almost shameful that it is the most often over looked aspect of good analysis. To seek the truth, by definition, we have to cast the widest net across the solution space as possible. To cast the widest net we must look beyond the solutions that are obvious, because quite frankly, those solutions are obvious. Fortunately there is a scientific method available to us. Again, we could not do justice to the scientific method a few blog essays, however, we can briefly outline what should be accomplished.

First establish a hypothesis for what it might be that you want to discover or at the least a hypothesis that suggests there might be something out there that you wish to discover.

Next run back to first principles. What are the governing physical laws that either constrain or open up your solution space to other things? The best way to know the truth is to know if the physics work. If the first principles work, by physical law, whatever you might be studying will also work, or at least be in the decision space. If you reduce it to first principles and are solid here, you most likely will be solid in your solution.

Next comes the investigation. This is the fun part and really consists on putting on your lab coat and becoming a scientist. Poking and probing at things. Taking them apart and putting them back together in different ways. Measuring and taking temperatures. Watching for color changes and checking to see when things either boil or break. And then documenting all the results. This will be the process that leads to the discovery of new things. In relentless pursuit of the truth, you must have the curiosity to explore these heights and depths. This is your chance to sail on the HMS Beagle and document and name yet undiscovered life in your decision space. Why would anyone ever give up this part.

If you discover new life, publish your findings. Perhaps your new life will ultimately not be the truth or the solution to the problem you were seeking, but it is part of the process that will add to your job satisfaction. This is also not the place to take all the credit. This is the time when the intellectual credit should be shared with your team members. Everyone will want to share in the discovery of something new.

Through publication you are naturally putting forth your work for peer review. This also is a major factor in the scientific method and should not be avoided. Although sometimes in the heat of battle it is difficult to find the time to get this done. You will be happier if your discovery begins to have credibility in a larger circle. Or, if it can’t stand up to peer review, you can gracefully back down. If you have found the truth, you should not fear others either working to found the same truth – because they will in fact discover the same thing. If they do not, then you have not either, and this is a good thing to know.

It will be reassuring to note that the truth will hold up if you have logically arrived at your assertions and your first principles are firm. If there is a dispute of the truth at this level, logically speaking, someone is in error, and that can be proven with empirical fact. It just means the experiment should be repeated. Again, the truth should never be feared. If you have been in error, you want to know this. If the other guy is in error then you want to know this as well.