The scientific method also includes other components that are necessary, even if all the iterations of the above steps are completed: The peer review process involves the evaluation of the experience by experts, who usually give their opinion anonymously. Some journals require the experimenter to provide lists of potential peer reviewers, especially if the field is highly specialized. The peer review does not attest to the accuracy of the results, but only that, in the opinion of the examiner, the experiments themselves were well founded (according to the experimenter`s description). If the work passes peer review, which may sometimes require new experiments requested by the reviewers, it will be published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal. The specific journal that publishes the results indicates the perceived quality of the work.  If an experiment cannot be repeated to obtain the same results, it means that the original results may have been defective. As a result, it is common for a single experiment to be conducted multiple times, especially if there are uncontrolled variables or other evidence of experimental errors. For significant or surprising results, other scientists may also try to replicate the results for themselves, especially if those results are important for their own work.  Replication has become a controversial topic in the social and biomedical sciences, where treatments are given to groups of individuals. As a rule, an experimental group receives the treatment,. B for example a drug, and the control group receives a placebo.
John Ioannidis pointed out in 2005 that the method used has led to many ideas that cannot be replicated.  The scientific method is based on increasingly sophisticated characterizations of the objects of investigation. (Topics can also be called unsolved or unknown issues.) For example, Benjamin Franklin rightly suspected that the St. Elmo fire was electrical in nature, but it took a long series of experiments and theoretical changes to determine it. In the search for the relevant characteristics of the subjects, in-depth reflection may also include certain definitions and observations; observations often require careful measurements and/or counts. Each element of the scientific method is peer-reviewed for possible errors. These activities do not describe everything scientists do (see below), but apply primarily to experimental sciences (e.g., physics, chemistry, and biology). B). The above elements are often taught in the education system as „the scientific method“.
 A single measurement may be accurate or inaccurate, depending on how close it comes to the actual value. Suppose you run an experiment to determine the density of an aluminum metal sample. The accepted value of a measure is the true or correct value based on a general agreement with a reliable reference. For aluminium, the accepted density is 2.70 g/cm3. The experimental value of a measurement is the value measured during the experiment. Suppose you determine an experimental value for aluminum density of 2.42 g/cm3 in your experiment. The error of an experiment is the difference between experimental and accepted values. The scientific method is iterative. At any time, it is possible to refine its accuracy and precision, so that certain considerations lead the scientist to repeat an earlier part of the process. Failure to develop an interesting hypothesis can lead a scientist to redefine the subject under consideration. Failure of a hypothesis to make interesting and verifiable predictions can lead to a test of the hypothesis or definition of the subject.
The failure of an experiment to provide interesting results can cause a scientist to rethink the experimental method, hypothesis or definition of the subject. The high esteem in which scientific results are held in Western society has led to a number of political controversies over scientific issues. An alleged 19th century conflict thesis proposed between religion and science has been cited by some as representative of a struggle between tradition and substantial change and faith and reason. [Citation needed]. A popular example used to support this thesis is when Galileo was put on trial before the Inquisition regarding the heliocentric model.  The persecution began after Pope Urban VIII allowed Galileo to write on the Copernican model. Galileo had used the Pope`s arguments and put them in the voice of the simple brush in the book „Dialogue on the Two Main World Systems“ in the voice of the simple brush, which insulted him a lot.  Although many historians of science have discredited the conflict thesis, it remains a popular belief among many, including some scientists.