Scientists obtain a great deal of the evidence they use by observing natural and experimentally generated objects and effects. Much of the standard philosophical literature on this subject comes from 20th century logical empiricists, their followers, and critics who embraced their issues and accepted some of their assumptions even as they objected to specific views. Their discussions of observational evidence tend to focus on epistemological questions about its role in theory testing. This entry follows their lead even though observational evidence also plays important and philosophically interesting roles in other areas including scientific discovery, the development of experimental tools and techniques, and the application of scientific theories to practical problems.
The issues that get the most attention in the standard philosophical literature on observation and theory have to do with the distinction between observables and unobservables, the form and content of observation reports, and the epistemic bearing of observational evidence on theories it is used to evaluate.
This is because, If the probes are identical, then the one that feels a larger gravitational force is orbiting closer to Jupiter than the other one is.
We should reply by telling the health magazine that every individual in the population should try to follow 'The Recommended Dietary Allowances'. The Food and Nutrition Board of the National Research Council/ National Academy of Sciences has made the RDA which determines the estimated amount of nutrients and calories that a person should uptake in order to live in a healthy manner. It also guides about the top sources of food which can be taken to fulfill the requirements.
