Kamis, 14 Juni 2012

GEOGRAFI FISIK

FUNDAMENTALS OF PHYSICAL GEOGRAPHY (2nd Edition)
 
CHAPTER 3: The Science of Physical Geography
 

(a). Scientific Method

Francis Bacon (1561-1626), a 17th century English philosopher, was the first individual to suggest a universal methodology for science. Bacon believed that scientific method required an inductive process of inquiry. Karl Popper later refuted this idea in the 20th century. Popper suggested that science could only be done using a deductive methodology. The next topic (3b) examines Karl Popper's recommended methodology for doing science more closely.
Science is simply a way of acquiring knowledge about nature and the Universe. To practice science, one must follow a specific universal methodology. The central theme of this methodology is the testing of hypotheses. A hypothesis can be defined as a proposal intended to explain certain facts or observations that has not been formally tested. The overall goal of science is to better comprehend the world around us. Various fields of study, like physics, chemistry, biology, medicine and the earth sciences, have used science exclusively to expand their knowledge base. Science allows its practitioners to acquire knowledge using techniques that are both neutral and unbiased.
The broadest, most inclusive goal of science is to understand (see Figure 3a-1). Understanding involves two interconnected processes: explanation and confirmation. Explanation is perhaps the most important basic goal of understanding. Explanation consists of explaining reality with a system of hypotheses, theories, and laws. Explanation may also relate observed phenomena to a system of empirical formulas, or link them to mechanisms that are hierarchically structured at both higher and lower levels of function. A theory can be defined as a collection of logical ideas that are used to explain something. The process of testing, refining, and re-testing hypotheses constructs theories. The nature of this confirmation process suggests that theories are rarely static..
Understanding
Figure 3a-1: Relationship between reality, theory, and understanding in science. This model suggests that we develop scientific theories to explain phenomena found in reality. Once a theory is established, it must be confirmed by re-examining reality to find contrary data. If contrary data is found, the theory is modified to include this new information and the confirmation process begins again. The process of validating theories is endless process because we can never assume that we have considered all possibilities.

Process of Understanding
Figure 3a-2: Facilitating tools involved explanation and confirmation.

Explanation has two important secondary components: idealization and unification (see Figure 3a-2). Idealization may be considered to be the condensation of a body of empirical fact into a simple statement. In the process of condensation, some detail must be omitted and the processes and phenomenon abstracted. Idealization may also involve isolating the phenomenon from other aspects of the system of interest. A second aspect of explanation is the unification of apparently unrelated phenomena in the same abstract or ideal system of concepts.
Another minor goal of science is the confirmation of constructed models or theories associated with understanding. Confirmation is accomplished through hypothesis testing, prediction, and by running experiments. The next topic (3b) examines these aspects of science in greater detail.

(b). The Hypothetico-Deductive Method

Philosopher Karl Popper suggested that it is impossible to prove a scientific theory true by means of induction, because no amount of evidence assures us that contrary evidence will not be found. Instead, Karl Popper proposed that proper science is accomplished by deduction. Deduction involves the process of falsification. Falsification is a particular specialized aspect of hypothesis testing. It involves stating some output from theory in specific and then finding contrary cases using experiments or observations. The methodology proposed by Popper is commonly known as the hypothetico-deductive method.
Popper's version of scientific method first begins with the postulation of a hypothesis. A hypothesis is an educated guess or a theory that explains some phenomenon. The researcher then tries to prove or test this scientific theory false through prediction or experimentation (see Figure 3a-2).A prediction is a forecast or extrapolation from the current state of the system of interest. Predictions are most useful if they can go beyond simple forecast. An experiment is a controlled investigation designed to evaluate the outcomes of causal manipulations on some system of interest.
To get a better understanding of the hypothetico-deductive method, we can examine the following geographic phenomena. In the brackish tidal marshes of the Pacific Coast of British Columbia and Washington, we find that the plants in these communities spatially arrange themselves in zones that are defined by elevation. Near the shoreline plant communities are dominated primarily by a single species known as Scirpus americanus. At higher elevations on the tidal marsh Scirpus americanus disappears and a species called Carex lyngbyei becomes widespread. The following hypothesis has been postulated to explain this unique phenomenon:
The distribution of Scirpus americanus and Carex lyngbyei is controlled by their tolerances to the frequency of tidal flooding. Scirpus americanus is more tolerant of tidal flooding than Carex lyngbyei and as a result it occupies lower elevations on the tidal marsh. However, Scirpus americanus cannot survive in the zone occupied by Carex lyngbyei because not enough flooding occurs. Likewise, Carex lyngbyei is less tolerant of tidal flooding than Scirpus americanus and as a result it occupies higher elevations on the tidal marsh. Carex lyngbyei cannot survive in the zone occupied by Scirpus americanus because too much flooding occurs.
According to Popper, to test this theory a scientist would now have to prove it false. As discussed above this can be done in two general ways: 1) predictive analysis; or 2) by way of experimental manipulation. Each of these methods has been applied to this problem and the results are described below.

Predictive Analysis
If the theory is correct, we should find that in any tidal marsh plant community that contains Scirpus americanus and Carex lyngbyei that the spatial distribution of these two species should be similar in all cases. This is indeed true. However, there could be some other causal factor, besides flooding frequency, that may be responsible for these unique spatial patterns.

Experimental Manipulation
If the two species are transplanted into the zones of the other they should not be able to survive. An actual transplant experiment found that Scirpus americanus can actually grow in the zone occupied by Carex lyngbyei, while Carex lyngbyei could also grow at lower Scirpus sites. However, this growth became less vigorous as the elevation became lower and at a certain elevation it could not grow at all. These results falsify the postulated theory. So the theory must be modified based on the results and tested again.
The process of testing theories in science is endless. Part of this problem is related to the complexity of nature. Any one phenomenon in nature is influenced by numerous factors each having its particular cause and effect. For this reason, one positive test result is not conclusive proof that the phenomenon under study is explained. However, some tests are better than others and provide us with stronger confirmation. These tests usually allow for the isolation of the phenomena from the effects of causal factors. Manipulative experiments tend to be better than tests based on prediction in this respect.

(c). Concepts of Time and Space in Physical Geography

The concepts of time and space are very important for understanding the function of phenomena in the natural world. Time is important to Physical Geographers because the spatial patterns they study can often only be explained in historic terms. The measurement of time is not absolute. Time is perceived by humans in a relative fashion by using human created units of measurement. Examples of human created units of time are the measurement of seconds, minutes, hours, and days.
Geographers generally conceptualize two types of space. Concrete space represents the real world or environment. Abstract space models reality in a way that distills much of the spatial information contained in the real world. Maps are an excellent example of abstract space. Finally, like time, space is also perceived by humans in a relative fashion by using human created units of measurement.
Both time and space are variable in terms of scale. As such, researchers of natural phenomena must investigate their subjects in the appropriate temporal and/or spatial scales. For example, an investigator studying a forest ecosystem will have to deal with completely different scales of time and space when compared to a researcher examining soil bacteria. The trees that make up a forest generally occupy large tracts of land. For example, the boreal forest occupies millions of hectares in Northern Canada and Eurasia. Temporally, these trees have life spans that can be as long as several hundred years. On the other hand, soil bacteria occupy much smaller spatial areas and have life spans that can be measured in hours and days.

(d). Study of Form or Process?

Physical Geography as a science is experiencing a radical change in philosophy. It is changing from a science that was highly descriptive to one that is increasingly experimental and theoretical. This transition represents a strong desire by Physical Geographers to understand the processes that cause the patterns or forms we see in nature.
Before 1950, the main purpose of research in Physical Geography was the description of the natural phenomena. Much of this description involved measurement for the purpose of gaining basic facts dealing with form or spatial appearance. Out of this research Physical Geographers determined such things as: the climatic characteristics for specific locations and regions of the planet; flow rates of rivers; soil characteristics for various locations on the Earth's surface; distribution ranges of plant and animal species; and calculations of the amount of freshwater stored in lakes, glaciers, rivers and the atmosphere. By the beginning of the 20th century Physical Geographers began to examine the descriptive data that was collected, and started to ask questions related to why? Why is the climate of urban environments different from the climate of rural? Why does hail only form in thunderstorms? Why are soils of the world's tropical regions nutrient poor? Why do humid and arid regions of the world experience different levels of erosion?
In Physical Geography, and all other sciences, most questions that deal with why are usually queries about process. Some level of understanding about process can be derived from basic descriptive data. Process is best studied, however, through experimental manipulation and hypothesis testing. By 1950, Physical Geographers were more interested in figuring out process than just collecting descriptive facts about the world. This attitude is even more prevalent today because of our growing need to understand how humans are changing the Earth and its environment.
Finally, as mentioned above, a deeper understanding of process normally requires the use of hypothesis testing, experimental methods, and statistics. As a result, the standard undergraduate and graduate curriculum in Physical Geography exposes students to this type of knowledge so they can better ask the question why

e). Descriptive Statistics
Introduction
Physical Geographers often collect quantitative information about natural phenomena to further knowledge in their field of interest. This collected data is then often analyzed statistically to provide the researcher with impartial and enlightening presentation, summary, and interpretation of the phenomena understudy. The most common statistical analysis performed on data involves the determination of descriptive characteristics like measures of central tendency and dispersion.
It usually is difficult to obtain measurements of all the data available in a particular system of interest. For example, it may be important to determine the average atmospheric pressure found in the center of hurricanes. However, to make a definitive conclusion about a hurricane's central pressure with 100% confidence would require the measuring of all the hurricanes that ever existed on this planet. This type of measurement is called a population parameter. Under normal situations, the determination of population parameters is impossible, and we settle with a subset measure of the population commonly called an estimator. Estimators are determined by taking a representative sample of the population being studied.
Samples are normally taken at random. Random sampling implies that each measurement in the population has an equal chance of being selected as part of the sample. It also ensures that the occurrence of one measurement in a sample in no way influences the selection of another. Sampling methods are biased if the recording of some influences the recording of others or if some members of the population are more likely to be recorded than others.

Measures of Central Tendency
Collecting data to describe some phenomena of nature usually produces large arrays of numbers. Sometimes it is very useful to summarize these large arrays with a single parameter. Researchers often require a summary value that determines the center in a data sample's distribution. In orther words, a measure of the central tendency of the data set. The most common of these measures are the mean, the median, and the mode.
Table 3e-1 describes a 15-year series of number of days with precipitation in December for two fictitious locations. The following discussion describes the calculation of the mean, median, and mode for this sample data set.

Table 3e-1: Number of days with precipitation in December for Piney and Steinback, 1967-81.
Year
Piney
Steinback
1967
10
12
1968
12
12
1969
9
13
1970
7
15
1971
10
13
1972
11
9
1973
9
16
1974
10
11
1975
9
12
1976
13
13
1977
8
10
1978
9
9
1979
10
13
1980
8
14
1981
9
15
(Xi)
144
187
N
15
15

The mean values of these two sets is determined by summing of the yearly values divided by the number of observations in each data set. In mathematical notation this calculation would be expressed as:
mean () = S(Xi)/N
where Xi is the individual values,
N is the number of values, and
is sigma, a sign used to show summation.

Thus, the calculate means for Piney and Steinback are:
Piney mean = 10 (rounded off)
Steinback mean = 13 (rounded off)

The mode of a data series is that value that occurs with greatest frequency. For Piney, the most frequent value is 9 which occurs five times. The mode for Steinback is 13.
The third measure of central tendency is called the median. The median is the middle value (or the average of the two middle values in an even series) of the data set when the observations are organized in ascending order. For the two locations in question, the medians are:
Piney
9, 9, 10, 11, 12, 12, 12, 13, 13, 13, 13, 14, 15, 15, 16
median = 13
Steinback
7, 8, 8, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9, 10, 10, 10, 10, 11, 12, 13
median = 9

Measures of Dispersion
Measures of central tendency provide no clue into how the observations are dispersed within the data set. Dispersion can be calculated by a variety of descriptive statistics including the range, variance, and standard deviation. The simpest measure of dispersion is the range. The range is calculated by subtracting the smallest individual value from the largest. When presented together with the mean, this statistic provides a measure of data set variability. The range, however, does not provide any understanding to how the data are distributed about the mean. For this measurement, the standard deviation is of value.
The following information describes the calculation of the range, variance, and standard deviation for the data set in Table 3e-2.

Table 3e-2: Dates of the first fall frost at Somewhere, USA, for an 11-year period.
Day of First Frost * (Xi)
Xi -
(Xi - )2
291
-8
64
299
0
0
279
-20
400
302
3
9
280
-19
361
303
4
16
299
0
0
304
5
25
307
8
64
314
15
225
313
14
196
(Xi) = 3291
= 3291/11 = 299
 
(Xi -)2 = 1360
*The dates are given in year days, i.e., January 1st is day 1, January 2nd is day 2, and so on throughout the year.

The range for the data is set is derived by subtracting 279 (the smallest value) from 314 (the largest value). The range is 35 days.
The first step in the calculation of standard deviation is to determine the variance by obtaining the deviations of the individual values (Xi) from the mean (). The formula for variance (S2) is:
S2 = [(Xi -)2] /(N-1)

where is the summation sign, (Xi - )2 is calculated (third column), and N is the number of observations. Standard deviation (S) is merely the square root of the variance (S2 ).
In the case of the Somewhere data, the standard deviation is:
S2 = 1356 / 10
S = 11.6 or 12 (to the nearest day)

This value provides significant information about the distribution of data around the mean. For example:
(a) The mean ± one sample standard deviation contains approximately 68% of the measurements in the data series.
(b) The mean ± two sample standard deviations contains approximately 95% of the measurements in the data series.
In Somewhere, the corresponding dates for fall frosts ± one and two standard deviations from the mean (day 299) are:
Minus two standard deviations: 299 - 24 = 275
Minus one standard deviation: 299 - 12 = 287
Plus one standard deviation: 299 + 12 = 311
Plus two standard deviations: 299 + 24 = 323

The calculations above suggest that the chance of frost damage is only 2.5% on October 2nd (day 275), 16% on October 15th (day 287), 50% on October 27th (day 299), 84% on November 8th (day 311), and 97.5% on November 20th (day 323).

Tidak ada komentar:

Posting Komentar