mythbusters experiments for high school students

ChatGPT for Teachers

Trauma-informed practices in schools, teacher well-being, cultivating diversity, equity, & inclusion, integrating technology in the classroom, social-emotional development, covid-19 resources, invest in resilience: summer toolkit, civics & resilience, all toolkits, degree programs, trauma-informed professional development, teacher licensure & certification, how to become - career information, classroom management, instructional design, lifestyle & self-care, online higher ed teaching, current events, 5 mythbusters project ideas that won't poke your eye out.

The show “Mythbusters” has become known for its entertaining and educational take on common assumptions or “myths” about the world around us. Using scientific methods, popular legends, rumors and myths are either systematically debunked or deemed true (or at least plausible). Teachers and students who enjoy the show are often inspired by it, and might even find themselves wanting to verify some of the findings they see on the show in classroom experiments.

Safe and fun Mythbusters project ideas

On their TV show, hosts Adam Savage and Jamie Hyneman have access to experts in the field of firearms and explosives, not to mention an enormous amount of safety equipment. Since school administrators might object to daily calls to the fire department, here are five fun and safe Mythbusters project ideas that can be done in the classroom — no bomb squad required.

1. Dirtier than a toilet seat?

One often-quoted factoid is that due to constant handling, objects we use every day such as cellphones are covered in more germs, and therefore dirtier, than a toilet seat. This is a great candidate for a student Mythbuster project thanks to the theatrical gross-out factor — and proper use of the scientific method.

Choose a number of common objects to test. Ideas include:

• Kitchen sponge
• Light switch
• Computer keyboard
• Shopping cart handle
• TV remote control

Have students swab the surface of each item with a clean cotton swab and then rub each cotton swab one by one on its own clean Petri dish. Lastly, do the same process with a toilet seat. Label each Petri dish appropriately and leave the dishes overnight. Ask students to predict which item will have the most germs and take a vote.

When tested for microorganisms and germ colonies, the Mythbusters show found that the toilet seat actually had the least amount of microorganisms. Which had the highest? The kitchen sponge. What will your students find?

2. Pop rocks and soda: Killer combination?

There are still some people around who believe the urban myth that your stomach could explode if Pop Rocks candies and soda were consumed in one sitting (and that “Mikey” from the original Life cereal commercials met his demise this way).

Have students first combine Pop Rocks and water in a small bowl and see what happens. Then have them do the same with soda instead of water. They will see that the results are similar and that the candy sizzles but does not explode.

If they wish, the braver students may combine some soda and Pop Rocks in their mouths once they see that there is no danger of combustion. The main objective of this project is to show students not to blindly believe every rumor they hear.

3. The James Bond scuba suit/tuxedo test

This experiment was inspired by a scene from the James Bond film “Goldfinger,” in which Bond reveals an impeccable white tuxedo underneath the scuba suit he emerged from the ocean wearing.

As long as you have access to a swimming pool and an adult volunteer, it’s possible to recreate this scene and determine whether or not a full tuxedo could be preserved in wearable condition after being worn under a scuba suit underwater. Rent a tuxedo and dry diving suit for your volunteer (perhaps your principal?). Have him or her put on the tuxedo and then the diving suit (no need for scuba gear). The class can observe as your test subject enters the pool up to his or shoulders for 10-15 minutes.

The tuxedo in the Mythbuster experiment remained in perfect, wearable condition under a wetsuit in the water for 40 minutes. How will your student experiment fare?

4. Pirate eye patches: Fashion statement or practical tool?

This Mythbusters project idea explores an interesting question: Did pirates (and other seafaring folk) wear eye patches due to frequent eyeball-reducing injuries, or as a tool to help them see better when running above and below deck? For this experiment, you’ll need an eye patch and a few obstacles that can be safely used in near-darkness — for example, a short corridor to navigate or an item to locate in a closet.

A test subject should wear the patch over one eye while exposed to bright sunlight for a few minutes. For the first part of this experiment, the test subject should enter the darkened space and navigate the obstacle *without* moving the eye patch. Students can record the time it takes them to complete their task.

For part two, the test subject spends the same amount of time in the sunlight, but this time, switches the patch to his or her other eye after entering the dimly-lit obstacle space. How much faster do they complete their task?

The Mythbusters concluded that keeping one eye adjusted for dim light through the use of an eye patch was a valid method for sailors to maintain good vision while working above and below a ship’s deck. What will your students discover?

5. Will strangers accept free hugs?

There have been “Free Hugs” campaigns around the world, with different results. Have students challenge the myth that people who don’t know each other very will not want to hug one another. The school hallway or lunchroom are good places to conduct this experiment.

Test out different aspects of offering free hugs; which works better, a sign or a T-shirt offering “Free Hugs”? Have students test each method. The Mythbusters found that the T-shirt wearer tends to get more hugs than the sign holder. What will your students find?

Mythbusters project ideas can be a great way to conduct engaging and enlightening experiments in class. The ideas listed here can get you started, but if you run out, simply tune in to the show or brainstorm common myths and urban legends on your own. Best of all, you and your students will have fun while learning something in the process.

You may also like to read

• Math Project Ideas for the Ninth Grade
• 10 Creative STEAM Classroom Project Ideas for the Holidays
• 4 Biology Project Ideas for High School Students
• 'iPadSammy's' Guide to Integrating Technology in the Classroom
• 'It's Good' Isn't Good Enough: Getting Better Feedback in Peer Review Workshops
• Chemistry Project Ideas That Reinforce STEAM Learning

Categorized as: Tips for Teachers and Classroom Resources

Tagged as: Engaging Activities ,  Math and Science

• Degrees and Certificates for Teachers & Educa...
• Online & Campus Master's in Secondary Educati...
• Certificates Programs in Education

Teaching With The Mythbusters

I use the Mythbusters as a teaching tool in my science classroom. I thought it might be helpful to tease out the science of the show, and share what I've learned along the way. Please comment and let me know what I can do to make the site more useful.

Sunday, February 6, 2011

Using mythbusters in the classroom, 3 comments:.

Have you ever thought about creating your own myths and have the students investigate? I am currently looking into this for a grade 5 class.

Hey there, I'm a Physics teacher in Newcastle, England and was hoping to talk to you about your ideas with Mythbusters. Please message me if this sounds o.k to you? :) Kind Regards, David

This sick physics teacher thanks you a million times for your PDF worksheet for any episode. You're saving my life!

Please let me know if this was helpful. If there was something you were looking for, let me know, so I can get it for you.

To revisit this article, visit My Profile, then View saved stories .

• The Big Story
• Newsletters
• Steven Levy's Plaintext Column
• WIRED Classics from the Archive
• WIRED Insider
• WIRED Consulting

5 of the Greatest Physics Demos From the MythBusters

Yes, this is the final season of the MythBusters . The greatest part of the show is the fact Adam Savage and Jamie Hyneman aren't scientists but they still do some awesome science. They show us that everyone can do science---the MythBusters simply have better building skills than most of us.

As a physics educator, I've been impressed by the excellent physics demos the MythBusters make. Some of these are classic examples straight from your physics textbook and some are surprising results that no one expected.

Let's take a look at a few of my favorite examples from previous seasons.

When you take introductory physics, just about every book says something like this:

When we are looking at projectile motion, the vertical and horizontal motions are independent. In fact, if you shot a bullet horizontally and dropped a bullet from the same height, the two bullets would hit the ground at exactly the same time .

The instructor may then proceed to show you, using some small balls at low speed instead of real bullets. But would it work with a pistol? As you can see above, the answer is "mostly yes". In the high speed video, the dropped bullet hits just slightly ahead of the fired bullet---a time difference of just 39.6 milliseconds. Honestly, this is close enough for me.

But what if you include air resistance on both bullets? Do they still hit the ground at the same time? The answer is no. The dropped bullet will hit the ground first. Here is a more detailed explanation of why that happens . The short version is that the fired bullet has much more air resistance and this produces more vertical air drag than the dropped bullet.

The band Led Zeppelin was possibly first named Lead Balloon because everyone knows a balloon made of lead would fall out of the sky. But it is possible to make a lead balloon float. But how does it work?

Whenever something is displacing either a fluid or a gas, there is a buoyancy force on that object pushing it up. This buoyancy force depends on the density of the fluid or gas and the volume of the displacement. For many objects---like a car or a human in air, this buoyancy force is too insignificant to matter. If you take a simple party balloon, it has a significant volume and very little weight so that it can float.

The trick to making a lead balloon float is size. Think of a balloon as consisting of two parts. First, there is the filling gas---almost always this is helium since it has a density lower than air. Second, there is the "skin" to contain that gas. For a party balloon, this skin is rubber or something, but the MythBusters use lead. Why does size matter? If you double the radius of your balloon, you increase the volume by a factor of 8 (radius cubed) but the area of the skin only increases by a factor of 4. So making a bigger balloon increases the lift (from the volume) faster than it increases the weight of the skin.

The MythBusters achieved this floating lead balloon by making it a cube with sides of 10 feet. Of course, you could probably even make it smaller and still float--- here are my detailed calculations of the smallest possible floating lead balloon .

Another classic physics textbook problem goes something like this:

A car is traveling at 50 mph. Would it do more damage to crash into a brick (and unmoving) wall or a head on collision with a similar car also traveling at 50 mph?

Most students would say that a head-on collision is worse than crashing into a wall. The thinking is that there are two cars in the head-on collision so it should be twice as bad. If it is indeed twice as bad then it should be the same as one car traveling at 100 mph crashing into a wall. But it's not.

Consider one car traveling at 50 mph crashing into a wall. The car goes from 50 mph to 0 mph over some time interval. This means the car has a change in momentum due to some external force (from the wall). Now switch to two cars crashing head on at 50 mph. Both cars still go from 50 mph to 0 mph so they each have the same change in momentum (but in opposite directions) requiring the same stopping force.

What about a car at 100 mph? Yes, this car would have double the momentum of a single 50 mph car. However, it would have 4 times the kinetic energy of a car at half the speed. As you can see from the MythBusters episode, crashing one car at 100 mph is way worse than a head-on collision between two 50 mph cars.

It is hard to believe that some people think it would be easier for hundreds of employees to keep their mouth shut about a fake moon landing than it would be to actually land on the moon---but there are those that think this. In this episode of MythBusters , Adam and Jamie tested theories about the moon landing being an elaborate hoax. The first deals focuses on a picture, shown above, of Buzz Aldrin in the shadow of the lunar lander. Conspiracy theorists argue that because Aldrin is in the shadow, he should be all but dark because the sun is the only light source. This is of course wrong because light also reflects off the surface of the moon and onto the astronaut.

What makes this episode so awesome is the attention to detail in the recreation of the Aldrin image. The MythBusters made a lunar lander and a replica moon surface to capture a model image using a single light source. The two images are fairly close to being identical.

I also like this myth because of it's demonstration of the nature of science. Does this photo prove that humans landed on the moon? No. Science never proves anything to be true. However, it does say something significant. Suppose you have an idea ( or I would say model ) that this image could only be created with multiple light sources. The MythBusters experiment proves this idea is wrong---since they did in fact make a similar image with just one source. So, science can prove things wrong, but not right.

What would happen if you shot a ball with a speed of 60 mph from the back a car traveling at 60 mph? Would the ball remain stationary? Yup---that's exactly what the MythBusters did. That animation is so awesome to watch.

This is all about relative velocity. The speed of the ball with respect to the car is 60 mph to the right (negative) and the speed of the car with respect to the ground is 60 mph to the left (positive). This means that the speed of the ball with respect to the ground is 60 mph + (-60 mph) = 0 mph. The math doesn't seem so complicated, but getting the relative speeds just right isn't so simple.

These are just five examples of MythBusters science; there are countless more. Perhaps I will have to share another five science explanations soon. Oh, and what about the final season? Will there be more great examples of science? I am certain there will be. It's going to be great.

• Elementary Science
• Busting Myths Using Science in the Classroom

Use the Mythbuster method and other exciting activities to jazz up your scientific method lessons!

By Jennifer Sinsel

Busted!  The Mythbusters phenomenon has proven or busted hundreds of urban legends over the years, and many science teachers have transferred the techniques used by the quirky duo of Adam and Jamie to the classroom. Using modern day science to separate fact from fiction seems as though it might require a lot of extensive knowledge or expensive equipment, but many of the investigations conducted on Mythbusters can actually be duplicated in the classroom – what a great way to learn about the scientific method and science process skills!

Using the Mythbusters Technique

Many Mythbusters episodes can be viewed directly from YouTube, or they can be purchased relatively inexpensively online.  Since every scientific investigation starts with a question, I usually choose a myth with which students will be familiar and pose the question on the board.  While watching the episode, students answer the following questions:

• What question are the Mythbusters trying to answer?
• Before watching the episode, write a hypothesis that answers the question.
• What procedure do the Mythbusters use to answer their question?
• Describe their results. Is their data qualitative or quantitative?  Give an example.
• What is their conclusion ?  List at least one possible source of error in their investigation!  (A source of error involves an issue that may have affected the outcome of the experiment. For example, the watering system malfunctioned in the Mythbusters’ plant investigation, which might have affected their data).

Share Your Favorites

A favorite question comes from the “Talking to Plants” episode: Does talking to plants help them grow?  During this episode, the Mythbusters grew pea plants in a number of different environments: with music (both heavy metal and classical), with talking (both angry words and kind words), and with no sound.  Surprisingly, they determined that the plants that “listened” to heavy metal music produced the greatest number of seeds! 

Students can partially duplicate this investigation by setting up their own “talking to plants” experiment. This often works best if you can partner with another classroom that receives similar light. In one classroom, students will ignore the plants (start with seedlings and begin the experiment when each of the plants has sprouted). In the other, students will take turns talking or playing music to the plants for one to two hours per day. All other variables (light, temperature, water, soil, etc.) should remain the same.  After several weeks, students can count the number of seeds produced by the plants, as well as the mass of the plants that have grown.  Do their results agree with the Mythbusters ? 

Opportunities for integrating other subject areas with an activity such as this are numerous. In language arts, students can write letters to Jamie and Adam sharing their results and asking follow up questions. Some students may even have ideas for future episodes related to the topic they investigated! In math, students can graph the changes in height or number of seeds produced over time. They can also calculate averages, practice measuring skills, or create their own word problems related to the investigation. A technology component could be added using Powerpoint, Hyperstudio, or Photo Story and students could show their presentations to other classes. For more exciting ways to teach the scientific method, try one of the following lesson plans.

The Scientific Method:

Paper Airplanes and Scientific Methods

Students learn about the scientific method by analyzing paper airplane design. Using this lesson, students do research, create a hypothesis, collect and record data, and analyze their data.

Precipitating Bubbles

In this lessons students use the scientific method to solve everyday problems. They perform an experiment in which they blow into a solution of calcium hydroxide to test for carbon dioxide, and analyze the results.

The Scientific Search for the Loch Ness Monster

Students gain an understanding of the real world implications of the use of the scientific method. They design experiments to debunk certain myths.

Start Your 10-Day Free Trial

• Search 350,000+ online teacher resources.
• Find lesson plans, worksheets, videos, and more.
• Inspire your students with great lessons.

Elementary Science Guide

Jennifer Sinsel

Lesson Search Terms

• "Scientific Process"
• Scientific Process Skills
• The Scientific Process
• Scientific Process Observe
• Scientific Process Food
• Scientific Process Bridges
• Scientific Process Measure

Recent Elementary Science Articles

• Turn Over a New Leaf This Spring!
• Winter Wonderland Activities
• National Oatmeal Month and Nutrition
• Integrating Science and Literature: Life as We Knew It

Five J's Homeschool

Free Homeschooling Resources to Help Parents Raise Lifelong Learners

Filed Under: Science  · Strategies & Tips · Free Curriculum  · Science

How to Teach the Scientific Method with Mythbusters

If you're a homeschooler and you've never heard about the Discovery Channel show called Mythbusters , you're missing out on a great resource for homeschooling. Mythbusters' hosts Jamie Hyneman and Adam Savage use the scientific method — and usually some black powder — to bust or confirm myths about just about anything. With crash-test dummies, homemade air cannons, and an abundance of explosions, Mythbusters is an incredibly fun and educational way to learn more about science.

Here's a small sampling of some of the myths Jamie and Adam try to debunk.

• Can fireworks really launch a person over a lake?
• Could MacGyver have blown off a cargo-ship steel door with only gun powder and a gun handle?
• Can a solitary stick of dynamite really sink a pickup parked on a frozen lake?

Jamie and Adam clearly demonstrate the scientific method in each episode. They may not use the terminology like "hypothesis," but they definitely use the scientific method. So it provides an excellent opportunity to discuss how scientific experiments are set up and run. As a bonus, viewers also learn a lot about physics and chemistry throughout the experiments.

Mythbusters is still shown on the Discovery Channel, so you can catch new episodes each Wednesday night. But many previous episodes are available online (that's how we watch Mythbusters since we don't have cable TV). To find Mythbusters episodes, just go to SurfTheChannel.com .

**Please note that there is some mild language in many of the episodes and some of the topics may not be appropriate for all ages. If you are concerned, I suggest viewing the episode before showing it to your kids.

Share this:

May 30, 2010 at 9:26 pm

I love Mythbusters and I let the kids use it as their only science when they were younger. As they have gotten older, my only issue has been that they play a little fast and loose with the statistics. It's not really a big deal for elementary age kids, but now that mine are in middle and high school, I often stop the DVR to discuss sample size, random sampling, etc. I haven't gotten into bell curves or anything that detailed. A few times, though, they claimed a myth confirmed or busted with a very small difference in results, a very small sample size, no statistical analysis, and no nod to the fact that they should have run the numbers. Can you tell I did some research in college? Yeah. It drives my kids a little nuts because this isn't an area that interests them right now but I want them to know now that they're older that rigorous science does demand more precision and accuracy. And it can be done with black powder, too!!

May 30, 2010 at 10:10 pm

What a great idea! We can view MythBusters instantly via Netflix and I've been looking for more ideas for science. Thanks! .-= Krystal´s last blog .. Sonlight Showcase–Elijah, Jonathan, and a Miniature Pinscher =-.

May 31, 2010 at 6:18 am

I love it!! My 9 year old son LOVES Mythbusters…he DVR's and watches every episode and we've got a couple of seasons on DVD. They're great! I've often said "Hey…this counts for science, right?!" Glad we're not the only ones! ;-D

May 31, 2010 at 8:52 am

I've also seen Mythbusters on Netflix Instant. Oh, just saw the above comment. lol .-= Ginger´s last blog .. A Meme or a Stream of Consciousness =-.

December 28, 2013 at 1:07 pm

I'm a brand new homeschool Mom of a high school boy. Do you just let them learn by watching? Do you have them write any papers to support what they are watching?

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

MythBusters: Busting Myths with Science!

Melissa White

What's included

3 live meetings, class experience, learning goals.

Other Details

Parental guidance, supply list, external resources.

Teacher expertise and credentials

Live group class, this class is no longer offered, financial assistance  , outschool international  , get the app  .

More to Explore  

Classes by age  , classes by grade  .

It’s a wonderful world — and universe — out there.

Come explore with us!  

Science News Explores

Mythbusters jr. puts kids in charge of testing myths — for science.

Six young makers and scientists join together in this new Science Channel series

Six young MythBusters join Adam Savage (center) in the new  MythBusters Jr.

Science Channel

Share this:

• Google Classroom

By Sarah Zielinski

January 2, 2019 at 6:40 am

Twelve-year-old Cannan Huey-You gets his first driving lesson in the opening episode of the new Mythbusters Jr . series, which premiers tonight on the Science Channel. This is different from how most kids learn to drive, and not just because of Cannan’s age. His instructor is veteran MythBuster Adam Savage. And one of his short travels involves taking the car for a spin on tires made of duct tape.

Cannan is one of six new, young MythBusters. Each comes with their own skillset and is experienced in STEM. (STEM stands for science, technology, engineering and math.) Cannan is a whiz kid, already a college sophomore at Texas Christian University. There, he studies astrophysics. Allie Weber, 13, from South Dakota, is known online as “Robot Maker Girl”. Valierie Castillo, 15, of Lancaster, Calif., is another skilled robot builder. Elijah Horland, 12, from Brooklyn, N.Y., taught himself how to build circuits and electronics. Jessie Lawless, 15, of Slidell, La., builds custom hot rods in his dad’s shop. And Rachel Pizzolato, 14, of Metarie, La., is a science fair champ who has competed three times in Broadcom MASTERS . (Broadcom MASTERS is run by Society for Science & the Public, which publishes Science News for Students .)

Fans of the original MythBusters will not be disappointed with this new version. Savage, a guide throughout the show, is not the only holdover. There are myths to test, of course. Buster, the crash test dummy, takes his place as stunt man. The builds can be incredibly long — and sometimes tedious. And in this first episode, there’s duct tape. Rolls and rolls of duct tape.

Savage and other original MythBusters spent many episodes testing the idea that there’s nothing duct tape can’t do. They busted that myth plenty of times. But they also found incredible uses for the stuff, including building boats and bridges. In the first episode of the new series, the young Mythbusters test two new potential applications for the tape: as tires and as a parachute.

The new MythBusters are split into two teams of three to tackle each of these myths. They have to work together to find efficient ways to build objects out of dozens of rolls of duct tape. They use math to predict whether their builds stand a chance of success. And they draw on all aspects of STEM to come up with a satisfying answer to the question of whether or not duct tape can do these new, crazy things.

You can’t help but be caught up in the enthusiasm of the young team members. And these kids aren’t thrilled only by the chance to drive a car or take a trip in a helicopter. They’re also excited to see their hard work pay off and get answers to the questions they were asking, all in the name of science.

MythBusters , of course, was never really a science show. No one was ever going to publish their results in a scientific journal. But the show wasn’t all explosions and crazy ideas; it regularly drew on aspects of science, such as using controls and not relying on a single result.

MythBusters Jr. continues this trend. It also shows that STEM is a team activity that requires a lot of hard work — and that it can be a lot of fun.

That’s definitely worth a watch.

More Stories from Science News Explores on Tech

This biologist tracks seadragons, with help from the public

Use of injectable GLP-1 weight-loss drugs skyrockets among teens

The brain of a tiny worm inspired a new type of AI

New system uses evaporation to greatly cool artificial turf

Want to spot a deepfake? Focus on the eyes  

Python fangs inspired a fix for shoulder injuries common in sports

Did builders of Egypt’s first pyramid use a water-powered elevator?

How the Science Entertainment Television Show MythBusters Teaches the Scientific Method

Submitted: 21 August 2017 Reviewed: 21 November 2017 Published: 20 December 2017

DOI: 10.5772/intechopen.72605

Cite this chapter

There are two ways to cite this chapter:

From the Edited Volume

Advanced Learning and Teaching Environments - Innovation, Contents and Methods

Edited by Núria Llevot-Calvet and Olga Bernad Cavero

To purchase hard copies of this book, please contact the representative in India: CBS Publishers & Distributors Pvt. Ltd. www.cbspd.com | [email protected]

Chapter metrics overview

1,445 Chapter Downloads

Impact of this chapter

Total Chapter Downloads on intechopen.com

Total Chapter Views on intechopen.com

All too often, high school—and even university—students graduate with only a partial or oversimplified understanding of what the scientific method is and how to employ it. The long-running Discovery Channel television show MythBusters has attracted the attention of political leaders and prominent universities for having the potential to address this problem and help young people learn to think critically. MythBusters communicates many aspects of the scientific method not usually covered in the classroom: the use of experimental controls, the use of logical reasoning, the importance of objectivity, the operational definitions, the small-scale testing, the interpretation of results, and the importance of repeatability of results. In this content analysis, episodes from the show’s 10-year history were methodically examined for aspects of the scientific method.

• science education
• science entertainment
• popular science
• MythBusters scientific method
• repeatability
• objectivity
• experimental design

Author Information

Erik a. zavrel *.

• Cornell University, Ithaca, New York, United States of America

*Address all correspondence to: [email protected]

1. Introduction

The importance of understanding and internalizing the scientific method can hardly be exaggerated: “The future of man depends upon his skill in solving problems … Recent successes in problem solving have brought about enormous changes in agriculture, industry, transport, medicine, and communications, which have considerably changed the pattern of human life and death” [ 1 ]. Unfortunately, it is all too common for high school—and even university—students to graduate with only a partial or oversimplified understanding of what the scientific method is and how to employ it.

Help in remedying this situation may come from an unlikely source: television. While most educational pundits bemoan the hours children spend transfixed by television, a few select programs are teaching the scientific method and how it is applied. One television show that is conspicuously good at teaching the scientific method in an easy-to-understand, pedantic-free, entertaining manner is the Discovery Channel’s MythBusters , which began airing in 2003. Indeed, MythBusters has attracted the attention of political leaders and prominent universities for having the potential to help young people learn to think critically.

For those unfamiliar with the show, its premise involves the hosts (Adam Savage, Jamie Hyneman, and build team members Tory Belleci, Kari Byron, and Grant Imahara) testing the validity of various urban legends, folk tales, common idioms, historical accounts, and internet viral videos using the scientific method: “Mr. Hyneman and Mr. Savage employ thinking and processes that are grounded in scientific method … They come up with a hypothesis and test it methodically” [ 2 ]. A myth can be deemed “confirmed,” “busted,” or “plausible,” if possible though highly improbable.

While the focus of the show is on entertainment, the hosts rigorously adhere to the scientific method: “The show’s genius is that beneath the kinetics and risky stunts – spectacular car crashes, explosions and other dangerous merriment – is a cleverly veiled science show that instructs as it entertains, which any teacher will tell you, is a real feat” [ 3 ].

MythBusters provides such a wealth of insight into the process of scientific discovery, in fact, that recently Stanford University created an entire course based on the show [ 4 ]. In the freshman course, “The Science of MythBusters ,” students learn the scientific method and how to think critically using excerpts from the show [ 5 ].

Indeed, MythBusters is so effective at communicating the scientific method that President Barack Obama has appeared on the show commending the hosts and stressing the importance of the show’s contributions to the society: “[N]othing is more important to our country’s future than getting young people engaged in math and science. A lot of the challenges that we face as a country are going to depend on how engaged young people are in science and so I’m just thrilled that you guys do such a great job making it fun [“President’s Challenge” [Original Air Date (OAD): 12/8/2010].

The scientific method is far richer and more nuanced than the abridged “five-step” system commonly disseminated in classrooms (define the problem, make observations, formulate a hypothesis, test the hypothesis by experiment, and draw a conclusion—confirm, abandon, or modify the initial hypothesis) [ 6 ]. The scientific method is “the method by which … knowledge is … won … an intellectual tool … a probe for exploring the unknown” [ 1 ]. MythBusters teaches many aspects of the scientific method not usually covered in the classroom: the use of experimental controls, the use of logical reasoning, the importance of objectivity, the operational definitions, the small-scale testing, the interpretation of results, and the importance of the repeatability of results.

2. Methodology

Complete seasons of MythBusters were downloaded from Apple’s iTunes Store, and the episodes were systematically analyzed in chronological order for aspects of the scientific method. The most common aspects quickly became evident, and examples illustrating those were sought in the content analysis of the remaining episodes. Narration and dialog were transcribed, and in cases of ambiguity, subtitles were consulted. The examples contained in this treatment should not be taken as exhaustive nor necessarily the most compelling, i.e., cherry-picked. For the sake of brevity, many equally illustrative examples could not be included. The analysis conducted was qualitative (descriptive) in nature [ 7 , 8 , 9 ]. Further work would be needed to treat the show in a quantitative manner (such as determining the frequency of certain aspects of the scientific method per episode and season) and was beyond the intended scope of this text.

Additionally, we designed and implemented a classroom activity to introduce the scientific method with a particular emphasis on experimental controls that utilized myths from the show. We did this with two sections (10 and 12 students) of the twelfth grade Regents Physics (designed to prepare students for statewide standardized examinations) at Onondaga High School near Syracuse, New York. The time commitment was approximately 90 min (1.5 days on an A/B schedule of alternating short and long classes). Complete activity details and materials are available online [ 10 ]. Because the format of each episode is to feature several different myths and to jump back and forth between them, we found that it is highly useful to make a note beforehand of the times of the specific segments we wanted to show, allowing us to present a myth in an uninterrupted manner, improving coherence and saving time.

3. Proposing a hypothesis

Before conducting an experiment, the MythBusters offer their opinion on what they think will happen; that is, they formulate a hypothesis: “Hypotheses can be considered as possible answers to problems … hypotheses do not as yet constitute real knowledge … [they] are … ‘candidates for truth’” [ 11 ].

In the “Anti-gravity” myth [“X-mas Lights and Anti-Gravity Device”—OAD: 12/19/2007], Tory, Kari, and Grant test internet-bought gadgets that purportedly employ antigravity in their operation ( Table 1 Entry 1). Table 1 provides a brief summary of all myths discussed herein for convenient reference. Grant explicitly states his hypothesis for the audience: “My suspicion about what’s going on here is that the large DC voltage is ionizing the air around the lifter and it’s creating a flow of ions, which is bringing air along with it, creating thrust. Now, what we can do to prove this, or disprove it, is to remove all of the air. If that’s the case, then there should be no thrust.” Inherent in all good hypotheses is testability. A hypothesis must be capable of being either supported or refuted, as Jamie explains, “That’s science: you come up with a theory, you test it, either it works or it doesn’t” [“Walk a Straight Line”—OAD: 10/12/2011].

Table 1.

Synopsis of myths discussed herein to be consulted by the reader for clarification.

Note: Myths appear in the order in which they are discussed.

No matter how eloquently formulated, a hypothesis must be empirically tested before gaining credibility. As the narrator notes, “[T]his is MythBusters and it’s not a fact until you test it” [“Blue Ice”—OAD: 4/13/2011]. In the “Depth Charge Disaster” myth [“Paper Armor”—OAD: 6/29/2011], the MythBusters test whether it is safer to lie supine on the surface rather than diving or treading water in the event of an underwater explosion ( Table 1 Entry 2). Before getting underway, both Adam and Jamie voice their skepticism about the myth, but as the narrator cautions the audience, “So both MythBusters are skeptical, but science is an evidence-based discipline.”

In addition, no matter how well accepted or long standing, a hypothesis is still subject to reevaluation and scrutiny, as demonstrated in this exchange among the build team members in the “Brain Drain” myth ( Table 1 Entry 3) [“Table Cloth Chaos”—OAD: 10/27/2010]:

Kari: “We are testing a myth that is so prevalent that it’s just taken for granted that it’s fact: humans only use 10% of their brain.”

Tory: “You hear that everywhere. It’s like ingrained in our society.”

Grant: “Definitely. But that doesn’t necessarily make it true.”

Occasionally, competing hypotheses to explain a phenomenon exist: “Rival hypotheses constitute alternative, incompatible or disjunct answers to some problem” [ 11 ]. This is vividly demonstrated in the “Diet Coke and Mentos” myth [“Diet Coke and Mentos”—OAD: 8/9/2006] when Adam and Jamie test different hypotheses for the vigorous reaction that ensues when Mentos mints are added to a bottle of Diet Coke ( Table 1 Entry 4). Various tendered explanations implicated the ingredients of the soda and the pitted surface of the mints. If dissolved CO 2 were the only factor, then a mint added to soda water should bring about the same reaction as a mint added to Diet Coke: “If CO 2 is the only factor, these two things should spurt the same height,” explains Adam. When the reaction with the soda water proves anemic by comparison, the MythBusters conclude that some other component of the Diet Coke is responsible for the energetic nature of the reaction. They go on to test each possible culprit—aspartame, citric acid, phosphoric acid, caffeine, and potassium benzoate—by mixing with soda water and noting the intensity of the reaction with a Mentos mint. On the contribution of the mint to the violent reaction, Adam states “The most common theory about what’s going on in this reaction between the candy and the soda is what’s called nucleation. Basically, the idea is that the surface of the candy is covered with microscopic pits and more surface area than you can actually see and each little pit, each little corner, provides what’s called a nucleation site or a place where a carbon dioxide bubble can form and escape.” To test this hypothesis, the MythBusters compare the reaction intensity of Diet Coke with two kinds of Mentos mints—one pitted and one covered in glaze—both made by the same company: “These two candies are made by the same manufacturer … using the same process but the colored version of this actually has a glazing over it – it’s a wax coating or a sealer – that inhibits the nucleation process that the other one achieves quite readily,” explains Jamie. If nucleation sites are what permit the CO 2 to rapidly bubble out of solution, then the reaction of the Diet Coke with the smooth mints should be much less vigorous than with the pitted mints. The MythBusters enumerate various competing hypotheses to account for an observed phenomenon and design experiments to systematically test each one.

4. Designing and carrying out an experiment

The MythBusters are thorough in their design of experiments, carefully noting to use controls and employing single-blind and double-blind techniques to avoid introducing bias and tainting the obtained results.

The use of controls in experiments is of paramount importance: anticipating and accounting for confounding variables are essential in the design of a good experiment. In “Cockroach Survival” [“Airplane on a Conveyor Belt”—OAD: 1/31/2008], Tory, Kari, and Grant test the commonly held belief that the only life forms to survive the radioactive fallout from a nuclear war would be cockroaches ( Table 1 Entry 5). They expose cockroaches and other insects to varying levels of radiation (1 kilorad, 10 kilorad, and 100 kilorad) and maintain a fourth set as a control with no exposure to radiation. This establishes a baseline for comparison. While none of the insects in the control receive any radiation exposure, they could die from other factors: “Scientific studies must adequately control for alternative explanations of observed data” [ 12 ].

Single static flag—red, white, and blue

Comparative static flag—all three flags

Moving flag compared to color

Human form with moving flags

In part 1, only one flag is present in the arena at any one time as it might not be color that angers a bull but the fact that it is the only salient object in an otherwise featureless pen. The result is that the bull charges all three flags. In part 2, all three flags—red, white, and blue—are hung in the arena to see if the bull prefers a certain color but charges all three. In part 3, the experiment tests the idea that it is a moving flag and not a red flag that infuriates a bull. This part of the experiment consists of a red stationary flag and a blue flag on a pulley being pulled back and forth with the result that the bull only charges the moving blue flag, not the stationary red flag. Therefore, it is movement that triggers an aggressive charge response and not the color red. In part 4, foam dummies in human form with waving and flapping flags—red, white, and blue—add a human element to the experiment. The last flag left standing is the red one with the blue and white flags taken down first. In this way, the MythBusters account for factors other than color: “Any extraneous variable that could provide an alternative explanation for the observed statistical relationships should be accounted for to show that none of these alternative explanations are the real explanation for the findings” [ 12 ].

The use of controls also factors prominently in the “Eye Patch” myth ( Table 1 Entry 7) [“Pirate Special”—OAD: 1/17/2007]. The build team tests the myth that pirates did not wear eye patches to cover an eye gouged out in battle but rather to keep one eye constantly night vision ready. In this way, one eye would always be dark-adapted so that if the pirate had to go below deck or enter a battle at night, he could see without difficulty. The build team designs an obstacle course to test the myth. As the designers, they are not permitted to navigate the course themselves: “If we’re building this obstacle course, we’re not going to be able to test it,” notes Tory. Instead, they have Adam and Jamie each navigate the obstacle course, first using the eye that was exposed to bright light (with the dark-adapted eye kept under the patch) and then using the dark-adapted eye. To prevent Adam and Jamie from clocking a faster time owing to familiarity with the course, the obstacle course is rearranged before the second run. As an additional control, Adam and Jamie are made to run the course a third time to prove that the faster times are due to enhanced night vision provided by the dark-adapted eye and not due to familiarity with the course by leaving the course unaltered from the second trial and having them run it without dark-adapted vision. As Kari explains, “We’ve left the course exactly the same as when they went through it with the adjusted night vision eye. This way we can totally, empirically prove that if they can get through this course and it takes them twice the time or any more time than it took them with their adjusted eye, we’ve … proved this myth … And as one last variable of final control, we sent them through that obstacle course one last time with their daylight vision, taking out the them knowing the course, and they still messed it up just as bad as the first time they went through.”

While some of the myths tested on the show strain plausibility, a robust scientific methodology is still employed. This dichotomy between silly myth and sound science is no more evident than in the “Talking to Plants” myth ( Table 1 Entry 8) [“Exploding House”—OAD: 11/16/2004]. To test whether sound can influence the growth of plants, the build team set up several green houses with pea plants inside. Some houses are exposed to recorded dialog, some to music, while silence is maintained in others as a control. As the narrator explains, the only variable is to be the sound: “As far as possible, conditions will be identical for all the plants except, of course, the sound.” When a timer that controls watering fails, all plants experience a lack of water and wither. However, as the narrator explains, “The only upside: every green house was affected in exactly the same way. So, although the plants aren’t a picture of health, the experiment is still valid.”

The MythBusters also incorporate the use of controls in their experiments for testing of “Animal Magnetism” ( Table 1 Entry 9) [“Shark Week Special”—OAD: 7/27/2008]. The essence of this myth is that sharks are repelled by magnetic fields, which interfere with their sensory apparatus. An initial test employs a control: “I’m putting a plastic card over the shark’s eye so that we can be sure that he’s reacting to the magnetism itself and not to the sight of the magnet being brought close to him,” explains Adam. In a second test, the MythBusters place a line of magnets across a tank to see if a shark will cross the magnetic boundary. As a control, they put down a line of similar looking lead weights to make sure the shark is not responding to the visual cue. As Adam explains, “You’re going to say, ‘But the shark is just disturbed by seeing a big line of stuff in their tank.’ Well, we’ve already thought of that, that’s why we’re going to start with a control. We’re going to lay a line of these innocuous lead weights across the tank and hopefully we’ll see the shark not care about these at all from a visual standpoint … For the control, we expect to see the shark swim up and down this track with no inhibitions. Then, we’re going to place a line of magnets somewhere along that track and see if the shark either resists crossing that line of magnets or doesn’t care that they’re there at all.” The MythBusters anticipate and account for possible alternative explanations of an observed phenomenon, just as students should be encouraged to use their imaginations to think of possible alternative explanations for the observed relationships between variables [ 12 ].

In the “Play Dead” myth [“Shark Week Special”—OAD: 7/27/2008], the build team tests whether sharks are attracted to erratic, jerky movements ( Table 1 Entry 10). In the experiment, Tory thrashes about in shark-infested waters, while Grant floats calmly nearby in the same waters. As a control, they reverse roles: Grant then thrashes about, while Tory plays dead. This is done to ensure that the sharks are attracted to movement and not something unique to the individual, as Kari explains, “They might have just been attracted to Tory; he might have been a bigger target.”

In testing whether swearing helps increase one’s threshold to pain [“No Pain, No Gain”—OAD: 4/28/2010], the MythBusters recognize that they must isolate the act of swearing from the act of speaking ( Table 1 Entry 11). To do so, Jamie and Adam have participants vocalize similar sounding non-swear words as a control while having their hands submerged in ice water.

When testing whether underinflated tires reduce fuel economy [“Mini Myth Madness”—OAD: 11/10/2010], the MythBusters stress the importance of accounting for other factors that may affect fuel economy ( Table 1 Entry 12). As Grant notes, “We have to have a very specific route. We’ll have to drive the same route every time at the same speed in the exact same way … the weight of the car cannot change between tests. That’s the only way we’ll be able to compare our results.”

In addition to accounting for other variables through the use of controls, the MythBusters also frequently employ single-blind and double-blind experimental procedures to avoid introducing bias into the obtained results.

In the “Eye Black” myth [“Viewer Special 2”—OAD: 2/13/2008], the MythBusters test whether applying black makeup to the skin beneath the eyes reduces glare in bright light ( Table 1 Entry 13). To ensure the validity of the results, the test subject is not told if he is wearing the black makeup. As a control, regular flesh-tone makeup is applied in one trial and the eye black in another trial. The test subject is not allowed to know if he has received the control or the variable under question as knowledge could influence the self-reported results.

In the “Top Shelf Filtration” myth [“Bullets Fired Up”—OAD: 4/19/2006], the MythBusters test whether it is possible to turn cheap, low-quality vodka into premium, high-quality vodka by filtering it repeatedly through a charcoal filter ( Table 1 Entry 14). Three participants are each given eight samples of vodka: one from each of six filtration stages, one shot of high-quality vodka, and one shot of unfiltered cheap vodka. They are asked to rank them in order of perceived quality. The experiment is conducted in a double-blind setup; participants and the administrator of the test are kept ignorant of the identity of each sample. As Grant elaborates, “These samples have been prepared and randomized. Even I won’t know which is which until the very end.”

In the “Battle of the Sexes” [“Battle of the Sexes”—OAD: 4/22/2012], the MythBusters test whether men or women are better at various activities, such as driving and cooking ( Table 1 Entry 15). In each of these experiments, they ensure that those conducting the assessments are kept unaware of the gender of the participants to prevent potential bias. As Adam explains, “[T]o eliminate bias we should make sure that the driving instructor does not know the gender of the person he’s testing at any given moment.” Later, Jamie reminds the audience of the need to avoid introducing potential bias: “The grilling will be assessed by a panel of judges. [T]his is a blind test, which means that the judges will not know the gender of the people that are preparing the food that they’re tasting.”

In the “The Smell of Fear” myth [“Fright Night”—OAD: 10/28/2012], the MythBusters test whether fear-induced perspiration noticeably differs from exertion-induced perspiration ( Table 1 Entry 16). To test this myth, they collect samples of sweat exuded during exercise and exuded while experiencing fear and see if volunteers can distinguish between them. To prevent the introduction of bias, a double-blind format is employed, as Grant explains, “So for our smell of fear experiment, it will be double-blind, meaning neither the volunteers nor Tory, who is administering the test, will know what sample is what.”

In their design of experiments, the MythBusters are careful to incorporate controls and to employ a single-blind or double-blind format to prevent introducing bias.

5. Formal logic

MythBusters demonstrates the importance of logical reasoning in science. This syllogistic logic is best explained by way of a simple example:

“B = A.

B = C.

Hence A = C″ [ 13 ].

The use of formal logic is demonstrated in the “What is Bullet Proof?” myth ( Table 1 Entry 17) [“Coffin Punch”—OAD: 11/5/2008]. The myth centers on the idea that a sufficiently obese person will have his internal organs protected from a bullet by the overlying layers of fat. Two important examples of formal logic are used to legitimately simplify the experiment. First, containers of lard are placed in front of a human analogue dummy in an amount corresponding to the world’s fattest person: if the amount of lard corresponding to the fat possessed by the world’s most obese person is insufficient to stop a bullet, then no person’s fat can stop a bullet. This logic is also used in choice of the firearms employed. If a round from a 45-caliber gun with the low muzzle velocity of 900 ft/s passes through unimpeded, it is futile to try larger caliber rounds as all have greater penetrating power: “If this makes it all the way through our fat and vital organs, every other kind of round we could fire would as well,” succinctly explains Adam. While the syllogism example utilizes mathematical variables and symbols and the myth utilizes containers of fat and the penetrating power of bullets, the principles are the same: “The validity or invalidity of a deductive argument depends on its form, and not on its content” [ 12 ].

6. Objectivity

MythBusters effectively communicates the jurisdiction and constraints of science. Science deals with matters in an objective fashion, and it is important that “students develop an understanding of … what science can and cannot do” [ 14 ].

Oftentimes, the MythBusters are confronted with having to assess something for which there is no obvious way to measure. In the “Beer Goggles” myth [“Alcohol Myths”—OAD: 10/22/2008], the MythBusters test the commonly held belief that the consumption of alcohol makes people perceive others as being more physically attractive ( Table 1 Entry 18). Early on, Jamie points out that this myth will be especially difficult to test empirically: “This seems to be a really subjective thing. We need to be objective if we’re going to be scientific.” In an attempt to quantify an essentially qualitative, subjective choice, the MythBusters employ a large sample size and numerically rate dozens of photographs of people while sober and while intoxicated: “The researcher may turn to rating as a last resort, when any more precise and explicit convention for scoring cases is either impossible or is deemed too much trouble” [ 15 ].

In the myth of “Taking Candy From a Baby” [“Mini Myth Madness”—OAD: 11/10/2010], the MythBusters are confronted with having to devise a method to measure something seemingly subjective in testing the idiom that taking candy from a baby truly is the epitome of effortlessness ( Table 1 Entry 19). They decide to “reduce the myth to a single quantifiable measurement – grip strength” by measuring the amount of force required to take candy away from newborns and infants (consenting parents were present) using a mechanical gripper.

In the “Square Wheels” myth [“Square Wheels”—OAD: 4/8/2012], the MythBusters test whether if above a certain speed, square wheels can provide a smooth ride ( Table 1 Entry 20). Testing the “smoothness” of a ride seems like an inherently unquantifiable, unscientific proposition, as Adam notes, “If these [square wheels] have any chance at all of giving us a smooth ride, how are we going to know beyond our own subjective experience? We need an objective measuring system for telling us how smooth our ride is.” The MythBusters decide to place vibration sensors on the suspension and steering column of their vehicle as well as on the passengers inside the vehicle. After reviewing the data from the vibration sensors, Adam concludes “[T]he data is pretty compelling and it actually seems to match what Jamie and I felt in the truck …”

Oftentimes, the MythBusters are confronted with having to assess something for which there is no obvious way to measure. In the “Driving Dangerously” myth [“Driving in Heels”—OAD: 4/29/2012], Adam and Jamie test whether certain types of footwear make driving dangerous ( Table 1 Entry 21):

Jamie: “[H]ow do you propose we test them?”

Adam: “[W]e each wear a strange piece of footwear with our foot all the way down on the accelerator. Then we time how long it takes to get from the accelerator all the way to the brake.”

In the “Tryptophan Turkey” myth [“Surreal Gourmet Hour”/“Food Fables”—OAD: 11/18/2012], Tory, Kari, and Grant test whether eating turkey makes you sleepy ( Table 1 Entry 22). As sleepiness is inherently subjective, they decide to measure their reflexes by playing a game of Whac-A-Mole. They compare their scores obtained after consuming tryptophan capsules, a turkey-laden meal, and a meal without any turkey but containing the same number of calories.

7. Operational definitions

MythBusters demonstrates the importance of operational definitions in scientific experiments. Operational definitions involve comparison of phenomena of interest against a standard: “Operational definition means defining the phenomena under investigation in such a way that they can be observed and measured, at least indirectly, in terms of other phenomena that can also be observed and measured” [ 12 ].

In “Water Heater Rocket” [“Exploding Water Heater”—OAD: 11/7/07], the MythBusters test whether a malfunctioning pressure release can cause a water heater to explode through multiple floors of a house like a missile ( Table 1 Entry 23). To ensure the validity of their results, the scale house they create is built to California building code specifications. They rigorously adhere to uniform standards and codes so that they can apply the results they obtain to existing houses.

Many of the myths tested by the MythBusters involve explosives. Operational definitions feature heavily in these myths. In the “Bourne Magazine” myth [“Blue Ice”—OAD: 4/13/2011], the MythBusters explore the combustibility of different ratios of air and methane gas ( Table 1 Entry 24). In their initial testing, they make use of operational definitions when employing the concept of standard temperature and pressure (STP) in determining the exact stoichiometric ratio of fuel to air that is explosive.

In the “What is Bomb Proof?” myth [“Running on Water”—OAD: 4/20/2011], the MythBusters employ Oseco burst disks as a way of determining whether blasts are harmless or would have resulted in injury or death ( Table 1 Entry 25). As the narrator explains, “We’ve used burst disks before on the show to find out if various shock waves were survivable without actually resorting to a human sacrifice. So in this control blast, they’re testing the outer limits of two differently calibrated disks: one set for certain death, the other for injury.” Grant provides a more detailed description of how these metal foil membranes, calibrated to burst at certain pressures, can be used to infer whether an explosion would have inflicted serious bodily harm or caused death: “We’re going to set up a number of radii from the epicenter of the blast. At each of these radii, we’re going to put two burst disks: one that goes at 13 [PSI], which is the threshold of injury, and one that goes at 75 [PSI], which is the threshold of instant death.”

Operational definitions again feature in the “Let There Be Light” myth [“Let There Be Light”—OAD: 6/22/2011], in which Adam and Jamie test a scene from the movie The Mummy that depicts an elaborate system of ancient Egyptian mirrors redirecting light from the sun to illuminate a dark tomb ( Table 1 Entry 26). The concept of operational definitions is introduced at the onset as this excerpt of dialog illustrates:

Adam: “[T]his myth is all about lighting up the darkness with the sun’s rays reflected. We need to answer the question: What does it mean to light up the darkness?”

Jamie: “We need to define that: What’s the minimum amount of light necessary to move around in an unfamiliar space?”

Later in the myth, Adam emphasizes the use of operational definitions yet again: “Before we start bouncing light around … with mirrors, we need to determine a couple of benchmarks that we’ll be aiming for in these tests … What is the minimum amount of ambient light required to see?”

The MythBusters excel at finding ways inherently difficult to measure and quantify phenomena using operational definitions.

8. Small-scale testing

MythBusters demonstrates the importance of small-scale testing in scientific experiments. It often behooves researchers to experiment with a small-scale model before investing substantial amounts of capital and time in a full-scale version. Technical concerns caught at the small-scale experiment can be remedied before the full-scale experiment is implemented.

In “Down with the Titanic” [“Down with the Titanic”—OAD: 1/25/2004], the MythBusters test the idea that a sinking ship generates a vortex powerful enough to suck people in the surrounding water down with it ( Table 1 Entry 27). They start off not by scuttling a boat but rather with smaller proof-of-concept tests using an aerator (bubbler) and hydrometer in a swimming pool.

In “Bubble Trouble” [“Bubble Trouble”—OAD: 4/27/2011], the MythBusters test whether it is impossible to swim in bubbly water ( Table 1 Entry 28). They begin with a small-scale test involving an aquarium tank and aerator along with a hydrometer to measure the density of bubbly water. This small-scale test yields a surprising result, with the MythBusters finding that the decrease in water density is offset and counteracted by the upwelling current of bubbles.

In “Wrecking Ball Baloney” [“Newton’s Crane Cradle”—OAD: 10/5/2011], Adam and Jamie test an internet viral video of a giant Newton’s cradle (a classic tabletop demonstration of elastic collision and energy transfer) made from wrecking balls set in motion by a crane at a construction site ( Table 1 Entry 29). The MythBusters decide to approach the myth cautiously rather than rush headlong to replicate the viral video:

Adam: “How do you want to proceed?”

Jamie: “[S]ince this is all about scaling the Newton’s cradle effect … why don’t we do it gradually?”

Adam: “You mean incrementally bumping up the size of our Newton cradles?”

Jamie: “Exactly, and see if we can tease out any kind of problems dealing with the increase in scale.”

Later, Adam reiterates the rationale for implementing a small-scale version of the experiment first: “Before we go to full-scale, we’re going to try a scale experiment with the simplest arrangement possible … it … ought to give us a good guide as to the viability of our concept for the large-scale one.”

In the “Square Wheels” myth (previously discussed), Adam and Jamie test whether it’s possible for square wheels to provide a smooth ride to a vehicle. They conduct small-scale tests involving a model vehicle on a treadmill to elucidate which wheel configuration gives the smoothest ride. This setup serves to provide crucial data on which configurations lead to dangerous resonance effects that might shake a vehicle apart at the full scale. As Jamie explains, “Our small-scale tests showed that the best configuration was to have two opposing corners with their points down, the opposite two corners with their flats down. That balances things out the best and so that’s what we’re going to do full-scale.”

In “Tablecloth Chaos” [“Tablecloth Chaos”—OAD: 10/27/2010], the MythBusters attempt to replicate another internet viral video that purports to show a quickly accelerating motorcycle being used to whisk a tablecloth free of a fully laden banquet table without disturbing a single place setting ( Table 1 Entry 30). Adam decides to start with small-scale testing for obvious reasons: “We’re going to scale this up to a fairly impossible dimension and I suspect that a lot of factors – object heaviness, cloth type, table type – all of these things – might affect our success on that scale. Thus, in the small-scale, we need to learn what factors are critical to making it work.”

The use of small-scale, proof-of-concept testing features prominently in myths involving explosives. In “Surfing with Dynamite” [“Lead Balloon”—OAD: 1/23/2008], the build team conducts a small-scale demonstration before detonating dynamite in a quarry lake ( Table 1 Entry 31). Using plastic bottles filled with subliming dry ice, they test wave generation at the surface of a pool while varying the depth of the explosion. This small-scale test tells them at which relative depth explosions create surface waves with the greatest amplitude. As the narrator explains, “So the guys have their proof of concept; an explosion will make waves and depth is a factor in the size and quality of those waves.”

In “Drain Disaster” [“Drain Disaster”—OAD: 11/2/2011], Adam and Jamie test whether a methane gas buildup in a sewer system can ignite and launch manhole covers skyward ( Table 1 Entry 32). Again, the MythBusters choose to begin at the small scale. As Jamie explains, “[B]efore we lock in on a full-size plan, let’s do a small-scale one first and see if we can learn anything.”

In “Valkyrie Boom” [“Operation Valkyrie”—OAD: 12/22/2010], the MythBusters test whether a last-minute change of venue from an underground bunker to an aboveground conference room prevented an attempted assassination of Hitler from proving fatal ( Table 1 Entry 33). Adam decides to start with a small-scale test to illustrate the difference between an explosion in a closed space, such as a bunker, and in an open space, such as an aboveground room with windows. In his small-scale test, Adam visualizes the wave mechanics by dropping weights into a tank of water. From the behavior of the ripples in water, Adam is able to collect evidence in favor of the myth that allows him to confidently proceed to the full-scale experiment.

In “Trench Torpedo” [“Trench Torpedo”—OAD: 10/14/2012], the MythBusters test whether, in World War I, building trenches with abrupt, right-angle corners served to prevent shock waves from exploding artillery shells from propagating ( Table 1 Entry 34). Adam starts exploring this myth at the small scale with wave tanks of different geometries: straight with abrupt, right-angle corners and with gradual, rounded corners. From this small-scale test, Adam finds a definite reduction in the amplitude of ripples in the tank with right-angle bends, lending credence to the myth and supplying the evidence needed to proceed with the full-scale experiment.

9. Interpretation of results

The MythBusters convey the intrinsic conservatism of science by not making sweeping generalizations or unjustifiably extrapolating the results they obtain: “[S]cientists and educators must resist the urge to state the case of science in terms that are stronger than the data support” [ 16 ].

In the myth of “antigravity” (previously discussed), the build team arrives at a conclusion of busted: “So anti-gravity is busted,” Kari summarizes. This prompts Tory to retort, “I don’t know if we can bust anti-gravity. I mean we can bust our devices.” To which Kari replies, “Alright. Revised. Anti-gravity busted … for now.” This exchange demonstrates how scientific explanations are tentative and that the current understanding of a phenomenon may not be the final word on the matter [ 17 , 18 ].

In “The Haunted Hum” myth [“Fright Night”—OAD: 10/28/2012], Adam and Jamie test whether an infrasonic hum may be responsible for peoples’ perceptions of certain buildings as being haunted ( Table 1 Entry 35). In this experiment, the MythBusters select four identical cabins in the remote woods as an appropriate venue for the myth. They apply the auditory stimulus in only one of the four cabins. They have participants spend 2 minutes alone in each cabin and report which cabin they found to be most unsettling. Most participants in the experiment found the first cabin to be the most unnerving, while the infrasonic tone was applied in the third cabin. As Adam concludes, “Ten tests. Ten test subjects. And I think we can definitively state that cabin 3 – the sound we put through it – did not make it the spookiest cabin. If anything, cabin 1 was the spookiest cabin, cabin 4, the least spooky. Now this could be because of one of two reasons. Either, because we had everyone enter the cabins in numerical order, the newness of the experiment and the weirdness of sitting alone in a room for two minutes made them the most frightened at the beginning and the least frightened at the end. The other reason is that cabin 1 could actually be haunted. But I don’t think so.” In this way, Adam masterfully demonstrates how scientists are cautious and conservative in drawing conclusions from their experimental data. The MythBusters excel at identifying alternative explanations to account for a finding: “Even a statistically significant relationship must not be taken as supporting a causal hypothesis unless all plausible alternative explanations for the observed statistical relationship have been eliminated” [ 12 ].

10. Repeatability of results

One central tenet of science that is often omitted from the classroom is the importance of repeatability. The essence of science is that any result should be able to be reproduced on demand: “We do not take even our own observations quite seriously, or accept them as scientific observations, until we have repeated and tested them … Only by such repetitions can we convince ourselves that we are not dealing with a mere isolated ‘coincidence’” [ 19 ].

In science, one person or team publishes its findings, and other people or teams seek to recreate the results. If the same materials are used and the same conditions are observed, then the results should be the same regardless of who conducts the experiment or where it is conducted: “The essence of the scientific method lies in the repeatable result: if you perform an experiment in the same way, nature will do the same thing again. This is the heart of science and is the sign that an observable phenomenon in nature has been found” [ 20 ]. This is what sets the scientist apart from seer, shaman, and oracle who purport to have a unique ability unable to be taught or communicated to others.

Lack of repeatability is often the deciding factor in the collective rejection by the scientific community of a new claim.

In 1977, SETI (Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence) astronomers at the Big Ear radio telescope at Ohio State University picked up an intensely strong, narrowband radio signal. The unique nature of what was dubbed the Wow! signal seemed to imply an artificial (intelligent) origin, but because the signal did not repeat, the existence of extraterrestrial intelligence could not be confirmed.

In 1989, scientists Stanley Pons and Martin Fleischmann claimed to have achieved cold fusion: the fusion of heavy hydrogen at room temperature. The claim caused a global sensation, promising to usher in an era of cheap, clean, limitless nuclear power. However, the inability of others to obtain the same results quickly led the scientific community to excoriate cold fusion proponents [ 21 ]. Indeed, the failure of other scientists to reproduce the results claimed by Pons and Fleischmann dealt a credibility blow so severe that the entire field has never recovered and is even today looked upon by the overwhelming majority of scientists as little more than alchemy.

The importance of repeatability is frequently emphasized on MythBusters . As the narrator reminds the audience, “Reliable results should be repeatable” [“Running on Water”—OAD: 4/20/2011]. This point is succinctly communicated in the “Primary Perception” myth ( Table 1 Entry 36) [“Deadly Straw”—OAD: 9/6/2006]. The build team tests the myth that plants are conscious and capable of exhibiting emotions, such as fear and anger, detectable by polygraph. When subjecting plants connected to bioelectrical monitoring equipment to physical abuse, the build team initially obtains some startling results that seem to indicate that the myth has some validity. However, upon further testing, they are unable to duplicate the surprising results. This prompts the MythBusters to classify the myth as busted, with Tory concluding, “If you can’t repeat it, it’s not science.”

11. Summary

Educators must use all tools at their disposal, including television, to improve their students’ understanding of the scientific method and instill in them an appreciation of its wide-ranging versatility. Understanding the scientific method and how to use it is more widely applicable and transferrable than the accumulation of disparate facts that can be recalled on a whim [ 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 ]. While formal student assessment was not conducted, feedback (via informal conversation) showed increased student confidence in identifying experimental controls and greater appreciation of the importance of controls in experiment design following the classroom activity we designed to introduce the scientific method utilizing myths from the show. MythBusters communicates the scientific method (proposing a hypothesis, designing and carrying out an experiment, etc.) along with its lesser-known components of experimental controls; the importance of logical reasoning, objectivity, operational definitions, small-scale testing, and interpretation of results, and the importance of the repeatability of results: “If the decades ahead produce another Thomas Edison or Steve Jobs, odds are that he or she will have grown up watching MythBusters ” [ 3 ]. Educators are encouraged to familiarize themselves with the show, starting with the episodes mentioned herein. These episodes can be purchased on DVD from the Discovery Channel website. They can also be downloaded individually or by season from Apple’s iTunes Store for immediate streaming.

12. Postscript

After a run of 14 seasons and 282 episodes, the MythBusters finale was aired in spring 2016; however, reruns continue to air on Discovery Channel’s sister network The Science Channel [ 26 ]. In addition, the Science Channel has announced that it is relaunching the show with new hosts to be determined through its new reality show Search for the Next MythBusters . Also, build team members Tory, Kari, and Grant will be investigating unusual events from pop culture, science, and history in the Netflix original White Rabbit Project . Lastly, a hands-on exhibition with artifacts from the show, interactive exhibits, and live demos called “ MythBusters : The Explosive Exhibition” was installed at the Mall of America in Minneapolis, MN, in 2016 and at the Liberty Science Center in Jersey City, NJ, in 2017. With reruns, a reboot, a spin-off, and a touring exhibition, the final pedagogical legacy of MythBusters is not yet written.

• 1. Bassey M. Science and Society: The Meaning and Importance of Scientific Method. London: University of London Press; 1968
• 2. Schwartz J. The best science show on television? The New York Times. November 21, 2006. Retrieved from: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/21/science/21myth.html
• 3. Webster L. The Mythbuster guide to Gonzo engineering. Popular Mechanics. Sep. 2009. pp. 48-57
• 4. Mehta R. Classy Classes: THINK 1 teaches students how to fail for science. The Stanford Daily. November 17, 2014. Retrieved from: http://www.stanforddaily.com/2014/11/17/classy-classes-think1-teaches-students-how-to-fail-for-science/
• 5. Carey B. At Stanford, 'The Science of MythBusters ' teaches the scientific method. Stanford Report. November 19, 2012. Retrieved from: http://news.stanford.edu/news/2012/november/science-myth-busters-111912.html
• 6. National Research Council (NRC). America's Lab Report: Investigations in High School Science. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2005
• 7. Elo S, Kääriäinen M, Kanste O, Pölkki T, Utriainen K, Kyngäs H. Qualitative content analysis: A focus on trustworthiness. SAGE Open. January–March 2014; 4 (1):1-10
• 8. Sutton J, Austin Z. Qualitative research: Data collection, analysis, and management. Canadian Journal of Hospital Pharmacy. May/Jun. 2015; 68 (3):226-231
• 9. Kohlbacher F. The use of qualitative content analysis in case study research. Forum: Qualitative Social Research. Jan. 2006; 7 (1):1-23
• 10. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Erik_Zavrel
• 11. Harsing L. Scientific Reasoning and Epistemic Attitudes. Budapest: Akademiai Kiado; 1982
• 12. Bueno A, Ellis R. The Craft of Thinking: Logic, Scientific Method, and the Pursuit of Truth. Atlanta: Clark Atlanta University Press; 1999
• 13. Jevons S. Principles of Science. New York: Dover Publications; 1958
• 14. National Research Council (NRC). National Science Education Standards. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 1996
• 15. Stephens W. Hypotheses & Evidence. New York: Thomas Crowell Company; 1968
• 16. Pedicino J. Teaching critical thinking in an age of political disinformation and perceived anti-intellectualism: Helping to build a responsible citizen in a community-college setting. Journal of College Science Teaching. Jan./Feb. 2008; 37 (3):10
• 17. Williams J. The scientific method and school science. Journal of College Science Teaching. Sep./Oct. 2008; 38 (1):14-16
• 18. McLaughlin J. A gentle reminder that a hypothesis is never proven correct, nor is a theory ever proven to be true. Journal of College Science Teaching. Sep. 2006; 36 (1):60-62
• 19. Popper K. The Logic of Scientific Discovery. New York: Harper & Row; 1959
• 20. Preston R. The Demon in the Freezer. New York: Ballantine Publishing Group; 2002
• 21. Browne M. Physicists debunk claim of a new kind of fusion. The New York Times. May 3, 1989. Retrieved from: http://partners.nytimes.com/library/national/science/050399sci-cold-fusion.html
• 22. Dykstra D. What should elementary science education be about? Journal of College Science Teaching. Jul./Aug. 2005; 34 (7):7-8
• 23. Firooznia F. Giant ants and walking plants: Using science fiction to teach a writing-intensive, lab-based biology class for nonmajors. Journal of College Science Teaching. Mar./Apr. 2006; 35 (5):26-31
• 24. Hohman J, Adams P, Taggart G, Heinrichs J, Hickman K. A ‘nature of science’ discussion: Connecting mathematics and science. Journal of College Science Teaching. Sep. 2006; 36 (1):18-21
• 25. Shibley I, Dunbar M, Mysliwiec T, Dunbar D. Using science popularizations to promote learner-centered teaching alternatives to the traditional textbook. Journal of College Science Teaching. Nov./Dec. 2008; 38 (2):54-58
• 26. Zavrel EA. In: Cavero OB, editor. Pedagogical Techniques Employed by the Science Television Show MythBusters . InTech; 2018. In Press

© 2018 The Author(s). Licensee IntechOpen. This chapter is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Continue reading from the same book

Advanced learning and teaching environments.

Edited by Núria Llevot-Calvet

Published: 18 July 2018

By Alexander Bolotin and Vladislav Bakayev

1238 downloads

By Sanmuga Nathan

1362 downloads

By Fernando Maureira Cid, Elizabeth Flores Ferro, Her...

1811 downloads

IntechOpen Author/Editor? To get your discount, log in .

Discounts available on purchase of multiple copies. View rates

Local taxes (VAT) are calculated in later steps, if applicable.

Support: [email protected]

• Grades 6-12
• School Leaders

Get our mega Halloween worksheets bundle! 👻

70 Best High School Science Fair Projects in Every Subject

Fire up the Bunsen burners!

The cool thing about high school science fair projects is that kids are old enough to tackle some pretty amazing concepts. Some science experiments for high school are just advanced versions of simpler projects they did when they were younger, with detailed calculations or fewer instructions. Other projects involve fire, chemicals, or other materials they couldn’t use before.

Note: Some of these projects were written as classroom labs but can be adapted to become science fair projects too. Just consider variables that you can change up, like materials or other parameters. That changes a classroom activity into a true scientific method experiment!

To make it easier to find the right high school science fair project idea for you, we’ve rated all the projects by difficulty and the materials needed:

Difficulty:

• Easy: Low or no-prep experiments you can do pretty much anytime
• Medium: These take a little more setup or a longer time to complete
• Advanced: Experiments like these take a fairly big commitment of time or effort
• Basic: Simple items you probably already have around the house
• Medium: Items that you might not already have but are easy to get your hands on
• Advanced: These require specialized or more expensive supplies to complete
• Biology and Life Sciences High School Science Fair Projects

Chemistry High School Science Fair Projects

Physics high school science fair projects, engineering high school stem fair projects, biology and life science high school science fair projects.

Explore the living world with these biology science project ideas, learning more about plants, animals, the environment, and much more.

Extract DNA from an onion

Difficulty: Medium / Materials: Medium

You don’t need a lot of supplies to perform this experiment, but it’s impressive nonetheless. Turn this into a science fair project by trying it with other fruits and vegetables too.

Re-create Mendel’s pea plant experiment

Difficulty: Medium / Materials: Medium ADVERTISEMENT

Gregor Mendel’s pea plant experiments were some of the first to explore inherited traits and genetics. Try your own cross-pollination experiments with fast-growing plants like peas or beans.

Make plants move with light

By this age, kids know that many plants move toward sunlight, a process known as phototropism. So high school science fair projects on this topic need to introduce variables into the process, like covering seedling parts with different materials to see the effects.

Test the 5-second rule

We’d all like to know the answer to this one: Is it really safe to eat food you’ve dropped on the floor? Design and conduct an experiment to find out (although we think we might already know the answer).

Find out if color affects taste

Just how interlinked are all our senses? Does the sight of food affect how it tastes? Find out with a fun food science fair project like this one!

See the effects of antibiotics on bacteria

Difficulty: Medium / Materials: Advanced

Bacteria can be divided into two groups: gram-positive and gram-negative. In this experiment, students first determine the two groups, then try the effects of various antibiotics on them. You can get a gram stain kit , bacillus cereus and rhodospirillum rubrum cultures, and antibiotic discs from Home Science Tools.

Learn more: Antibiotics Project at Home Science Tools

Witness the carbon cycle in action

Experiment with the effects of light on the carbon cycle. Make this science fair project even more interesting by adding some small aquatic animals like snails or fish into the mix.

Learn more: Carbon Cycle at Science Lessons That Rock

Look for cell mitosis in an onion

Cell mitosis (division) is actually easy to see in action when you look at onion root tips under a microscope. Students will be amazed to see science theory become science reality right before their eyes. Adapt this lab into a high school science fair project by applying the process to other organisms too.

Test the effects of disinfectants

Grow bacteria in a petri dish along with paper disks soaked in various antiseptics and disinfectants. You’ll be able to see which ones effectively inhibit bacteria growth.

Learn more: Effectiveness of Antiseptics and Disinfectants at Amy Brown Science

Pit hydroponics against soil

Growing vegetables without soil (hydroponics) is a popular trend, allowing people to garden just about anywhere.

More Life Sciences and Biology Science Fair Projects for High School

Use these questions and ideas to design your own experiment:

• Explore ways to prevent soil erosion.
• What are the most accurate methods of predicting various weather patterns?
• Try out various fertilization methods to find the best and safest way to increase crop yield.
• What’s the best way to prevent mold growth on food for long-term storage?
• Does exposure to smoke or other air pollutants affect plant growth?
• Compare the chemical and/or bacterial content of various water sources (bottled, tap, spring, well water, etc.).
• Explore ways to clean up after an oil spill on land or water.
• Conduct a wildlife field survey in a given area and compare it to results from previous surveys.
• Find a new use for plastic bottles or bags to keep them out of landfills.
• Devise a way to desalinate seawater and make it safe to drink.

Bunsen burners, beakers and test tubes, and the possibility of (controlled) explosions? No wonder chemistry is such a popular topic for high school science fair projects!

Break apart covalent bonds

Break the covalent bond of H 2 O into H and O with this simple experiment. You only need simple supplies for this one. Turn it into a science fair project by changing up the variables—does the temperature of the water matter? What happens if you try this with other liquids?

Learn more: Covalent Bonds at Teaching Without Chairs

Measure the calories in various foods

Are the calorie counts on your favorite snacks accurate? Build your own calorimeter and find out! This kit from Home Science Tools has all the supplies you’ll need.

Detect latent fingerprints

Forensic science is engrossing and can lead to important career opportunities too. Explore the chemistry needed to detect latent (invisible) fingerprints, just like they do for crime scenes!

Learn more: Fingerprints Project at Hub Pages

Use Alka-Seltzer to explore reaction rate

Difficulty: Easy / Materials: Easy

Tweak this basic concept to create a variety of high school chemistry science fair projects. Change the temperature, surface area, pressure, and more to see how reaction rates change.

Determine whether sports drinks provide more electrolytes than OJ

Are those pricey sports drinks really worth it? Try this experiment to find out. You’ll need some special equipment for this one; buy a complete kit at Home Science Tools .

Turn flames into a rainbow

You’ll need to get your hands on a few different chemicals for this experiment, but the wow factor will make it worth the effort! Make it a science project by seeing if different materials, air temperature, or other factors change the results.

Discover the size of a mole

The mole is a key concept in chemistry, so it’s important to ensure students really understand it. This experiment uses simple materials like salt and chalk to make an abstract concept more concrete. Make it a project by applying the same procedure to a variety of substances, or determining whether outside variables have an effect on the results.

Learn more: How Big Is a Mole? at Amy Brown Science

Cook up candy to learn mole and molecule calculations

This edible experiment lets students make their own peppermint hard candy while they calculate mass, moles, molecules, and formula weights. Tweak the formulas to create different types of candy and make this into a sweet science fair project!

Learn more: Candy Chemistry at Dunigan Science on TpT

Make soap to understand saponification

Take a closer look at an everyday item: soap! Use oils and other ingredients to make your own soap, learning about esters and saponification. Tinker with the formula to find one that fits a particular set of parameters.

Learn more: Saponification at Chemistry Solutions on TpT

Uncover the secrets of evaporation

Explore the factors that affect evaporation, then come up with ways to slow them down or speed them up for a simple science fair project.

Learn more: Evaporation at Science Projects

More Chemistry Science Fair Projects for High School

These questions and ideas can spark ideas for a unique experiment:

• Compare the properties of sugar and artificial sweeteners.
• Explore the impact of temperature, concentration, and seeding on crystal growth.
• Test various antacids on the market to find the most effective product.
• What is the optimum temperature for yeast production when baking bread from scratch?
• Compare the vitamin C content of various fruits and vegetables.
• How does temperature affect enzyme-catalyzed reactions?
• Investigate the effects of pH on an acid-base chemical reaction.
• Devise a new natural way to test pH levels (such as cabbage leaves).
• What’s the best way to slow down metal oxidation (the form of rust)?
• How do changes in ingredients and method affect the results of a baking recipe?

When you think of physics science projects for high school, the first thing that comes to mind is probably the classic build-a-bridge. But there are plenty of other ways for teens to get hands-on with physics concepts. Here are some to try.

Remove the air in a DIY vacuum chamber

You can use a vacuum chamber to do lots of cool high school science fair projects, but a ready-made one can be expensive. Try this project to make your own with basic supplies.

Learn more: Vacuum Chamber at Instructables

Put together a mini Tesla coil

Looking for a simple but showy high school science fair project? Build your own mini Tesla coil and wow the crowd!

Boil water in a paper cup

Logic tells us we shouldn’t set a paper cup over a heat source, right? Yet it’s actually possible to boil water in a paper cup without burning the cup up! Learn about heat transfer and thermal conductivity with this experiment. Go deeper by trying other liquids like honey to see what happens.

Build a better light bulb

Emulate Edison and build your own simple light bulb. You can turn this into a science fair project by experimenting with different types of materials for filaments.

Measure the speed of light—with your microwave

Grab an egg and head to your microwave for this surprisingly simple experiment. By measuring the distance between cooked portions of egg whites, you’ll be able to calculate the wavelength of the microwaves in your oven and, in turn, the speed of light.

Generate a Lichtenberg figure

See electricity in action when you generate and capture a Lichtenberg figure with polyethylene sheets, wood, or even acrylic and toner. Change the electrical intensity and materials to see what types of patterns you can create.

Learn more: Lichtenberg Figure at Science Notes

Explore the power of friction with sticky note pads

Difficulty: Medium / Materials: Basic

Ever try to pull a piece of paper out of the middle of a big stack? It’s harder than you think it would be! That’s due to the power of friction. In this experiment, students interleave the sheets of two sticky note pads, then measure how much weight it takes to pull them apart. The results are astonishing!

Build a cloud chamber to prove background radiation

Ready to dip your toe into particle physics? Learn about background radiation and build a cloud chamber to prove the existence of muons.

Measure the effect of temperature on resistance

This is a popular and classic science fair experiment in physics. You’ll need a few specialized supplies, but they’re pretty easy to find.

Learn more: Temperature and Resistance at Science Project

Launch the best bottle rocket

A basic bottle rocket is pretty easy to build, but it opens the door to lots of different science fair projects. Design a powerful launcher, alter the rocket so it flies higher or farther, or use only recycled materials for your flyer.

More Physics Science Fair Projects for High School

Design your own experiment in response to these questions and prompts.

• Determine the most efficient solar panel design and placement.
• What’s the best way to eliminate friction between two objects?
• Explore the best methods of insulating an object against heat loss.
• What effect does temperature have on batteries when stored for long periods of time?
• Test the effects of magnets or electromagnetic fields on plants or other living organisms.
• Determine the best angle and speed of a bat swing in baseball.
• What’s the best way to soundproof an area or reduce noise produced by an item?
• Explore methods for reducing air resistance in automotive design.
• Use the concepts of torque and rotation to perfect a golf swing.
• Compare the strength and durability of various building materials.

Many schools are changing up their science fairs to STEM fairs, to encourage students with an interest in engineering to participate. Many great engineering science fair projects start with a STEM challenge, like those shown here. Use these ideas to spark a full-blown project to build something new and amazing!

Construct a model maglev train

Maglev trains may just be the future of mass transportation. Build a model at home, and explore ways to implement the technology on a wider basis.

Learn more: Maglev Model Train at Supermagnete

Design a more efficient wind turbine

Wind energy is renewable, making it a good solution for the fossil fuel problem. For a smart science fair project, experiment to find the most efficient wind turbine design for a given situation.

Re-create Da Vinci’s flying machine

Da Vinci sketched several models of “flying machines” and hoped to soar through the sky. Do some research into his models and try to reconstruct one of your own.

Learn more: Da Vinci Flying Machine at Student Savvy

Design a heart-rate monitor

Smartwatches are ubiquitous these days, so pretty much anyone can wear a heart-rate monitor on their wrist. But do they work any better than one you can build yourself? Get the specialized items you need like the Arduino LilyPad Board on Amazon.

Race 3D printed cars

3D printers are a marvel of the modern era, and budding engineers should definitely learn to use them. Use Tinkercad or a similar program to design and print race cars that can support a defined weight, then see which can roll the fastest! (No 3D printer in your STEM lab? Check the local library. Many of them have 3D printers available for patrons to use.)

Learn more: 3D Printed Cars at Instructables

Grow veggies in a hydroponic garden

Hydroponics is the gardening wave of the future, making it easy to grow plants anywhere with minimal soil required. For a science fair STEM engineering challenge, design and construct your own hydroponic garden capable of growing vegetables to feed a family. This model is just one possible option.

Learn more: Hydroponics at Instructables

Grab items with a mechanical claw

Delve into robotics with this engineering project. This kit includes all the materials you need, with complete video instructions. Once you’ve built the basic structure, tinker around with the design to improve its strength, accuracy, or other traits.

Learn more: Hydraulic Claw at KiwiCo

Construct a crystal radio

Return to the good old days and build a radio from scratch. This makes a cool science fair project if you experiment with different types of materials for the antenna. It takes some specialized equipment, but fortunately, Home Science Tools has an all-in-one kit for this project.

Learn more: Crystal Radio at Scitoys.com

Build a burglar alarm

The challenge? Set up a system to alert you when someone has broken into your house or classroom. This can take any form students can dream up, and you can customize this STEM high school science experiment for multiple skill levels. Keep it simple with an alarm that makes a sound that can be heard from a specified distance. Or kick it up a notch and require the alarm system to send a notification to a cell phone, like the project at the link.

Learn more: Intruder Alarm at Instructables

Walk across a plastic bottle bridge

Balsa wood bridges are OK, but this plastic bottle bridge is really impressive! In fact, students can build all sorts of structures using the concept detailed at the link. It’s the ultimate upcycled STEM challenge!

Learn more: TrussFab Structures at Instructables

Looking for more science content? Check out the Best Science Websites for Middle and High School .

Plus, get all the latest teaching tips and tricks when you sign up for our newsletters .

You Might Also Like

The Big List of Science Fair Project Ideas, Resources, and More

Options for every age, interest, and skill level! Continue Reading

Copyright © 2024. All rights reserved. 5335 Gate Parkway, Jacksonville, FL 32256

Mythbusters Experiments for Kids

Children are often intrigued by myths, at least partially because they want to know if the stories are true or not. Whether at home or at school, you can introduce children to some projects so they can see the truth behind the myths (or lack thereof) for themselves.

Explore this article

• Personal Experiments
• Elements of the World
• Safety Myths

Some people still believe the legend that a part of your body would explode if you ate Poprocks candies and soda. Have the students grind Poprocks together in a small bowl and they will see that they pop a little bit just like that. You could also have them add a little bit of soda into the bowl so they see the Poprocks do not explode. They can even mix them together in their mouths, as none of their body parts will explode as a result.

2 Personal Experiments

Assign a different myth to each student. Be careful what you decide to classify as a myth. Avoid classifying Biblical materials as myths. Allow the students to pick their own myths to debunk. Have the students create their own science experiment where they prove the myth of their choosing is incorrect and then present their project to the rest of the class.

3 Elements of the World

Have students do projects to bust common myths they may have heard in past classes or on television. For example, some people believe that stars and constellations appear in the same place every night. Ask the students to chart the location of a specific star/constellation for several nights in a row to see if it is true. Other students may believe that air and oxygen are the same gas, so challenge them to engage in a research experiment proving if this statement is true or false.

4 Safety Myths

Challenge students to prove that a common safety myth is false. For example, have them explore whether incandescent lights really burn out from turning them on and off constantly by setting up a mock entrance way to a house or a room in the lab. Have them explore different myths surrounding food, such as the source of most food contamination problems or the actual risk of death for people who get salmonella poisoning.

• 1 Montessori for Everyone: Shattering Common Science Myths
• 2 PBS: Five Food Safety Myths-Debunked!

About the Author

Jen Marx holds a Master of Arts in English and American literature. She is a consultant at a university writing center and has numerous print and online publications, including "Community College Campus News." Marx specializes in topics ranging from wedding planning to history to the environment.

Related Articles

Pyramid Projects for the Sixth Grade

Activities for the First Day of Chemistry Class

Fundamentalism & Evolution Beliefs

Four Elements of Critical Thinking

How Many People Were Killed When Vesuvius Erupted in...

How to Teach the Scientific Method to Children

Data Collection Activities for Middle School Students

Different Types of Myths

What Are Light Orbs?

Animal Adaptations & Science Projects

Cloud Activities for Kindergarten

Lessons & Activities on the Three Little Pigs

Activities for Third Grade Students to Do on Komodo...

Digestive System Experiments for Kids

Meaning of Frogs in the Hebrew Bible

Kindergarten Lesson on Objects in the Sky

Rainforest Math Activities for Preschoolers

Poisonous Spiders in the Middle East

Difference Between Tropical & Temperate Deserts

Beliefs of the Zoroastrians on Hell

Regardless of how old we are, we never stop learning. Classroom is the educational resource for people of all ages. Whether you’re studying times tables or applying to college, Classroom has the answers.

• Accessibility
• Terms of Use
• Privacy Policy
• Copyright Policy
• Manage Preferences

© 2020 Leaf Group Ltd. / Leaf Group Media, All Rights Reserved. Based on the Word Net lexical database for the English Language. See disclaimer .

• Arts & Culture
• Beauty & Wellness
• Fashion & Brands
• Food & Beverage
• Home & Living
• Press Releases

Mythbusters Jr. | Five Easy-To-Do Science Experiments At Home

Summer is just around the corner and kids will soon be starting their breaks from school. Making plans for thrilling summer adventures is certainly a must, but the blazing heat can sometimes get in the way. To make this season more enjoyable, here are five science experiments you can do at home with kids:

1. Dancing raisins What you need: Raisins, Clear soda, and Clear glass

To make raisins come to life, fill the glass with warm and clear soda and drop the raisins in the glass. Raisins are denser than the soda which makes it possible for them to sink, but science explains that the soda’s air bubbles formed on the raisins’ bodies allow the fruit to float. When the bubbles disappear, the raisins will sink from the glass, as if they are dancing in the disco!

2. Hidden message What you need: Lemon, Water, Paper, Cotton buds, Bowl, and Light bulb

Want to send a secret message? Mix lemon extract with droplets of water, dip a cotton bud in the mix that will serve as ink, and start writing your message in a clear white paper. When the juice dries up, the writing will become invisible like a hidden letter, and will only appear when heated above a light bulb. Due to its organic nature, lemon juice oxidizes and becomes brown when heated. Mixing it with water transforms it into an almost invisible substance and will only get revealed when put in high temperature.

3. Bouncing egg What you need: Raw egg, White vinegar, and Bowl

Along with sports, science can similarly make an object bounce. When an egg gets soaked in vinegar for 72 hours, it can actually bounce from up to 20 cm above ground when the shell is removed. Since vinegar is a weak acid, it can peel off the shell without damaging insides of the egg. Eggs are made of calcium carbonate that reacts when exposed to acids like vinegar, turning the egg intact and rubbery enough to make it bounce.

4. Water cycle in a bottle What you need: Plastic bottle, Plastic cup, Ice cubes, and Food coloring

The water cycle, where water evaporates and comes back as rain, can be bottled up in one science experiment. Mix a drop of food coloring inside the plastic bottle, fill up 1/3 of it with water, and close the cap. Turn the bottle upside down inside a cup, place a few ice cubes on top of the bottle, and place under a sunny location. After an hour, there will be water droplets in the upper part of the bottle, which resembles how the water cycle works on Earth.

5. Static electricity What you need: Balloon

You might be getting a new temporary hairstyle in this scientific experiment. Try it by rubbing a balloon against your hair for a few seconds, and your hair will follow as you pull the balloon away afterwards. This happens because of static electricity, where negatively charged particles interact with positively charged particles.

This roster of easy experiments can make up for an exciting summer vacation, where young discoverers can experience the fun and magic of science. Further explore the fascinating world of science and tune in to Mythbusters Jr. on March 6, 9:00 PM on Discovery Channel . Witness Adam Savage along with six youthful myth busters as they test popular myths and legends using modern science.

TEAM ORANGE is Orange Magazine TV's select contributors. It also contains Press Releases. Please follow @OrangeMagTV on Twitter for other updates.

Related Posts

Hyatt unveils plans for hyatt regency samarafushi maldives, huawei’s all-round watch gt 5 series now available for pre-order, starting at p12,999, 5 best date spots in eastwood city for a memorable experience.

Uważaj, żebyś przez nieuwagę nie stworzył czegoś wiekopomnego i na stałe wpisał się w cyfrowy świat internetu. :-)

Tak czytam twego bloga od jakiegoś czasu, ciągle mnie coś zastanawia, mie wyprowadzasz czytelnika do “ciemnego lasu”.

Fajnie, że są wyszukiwarki internetowe i takie portale w sieci jak Twój. Jest merytoryczny i lekko zabawny. Widać, że wkładasz wiele serca w każdy post. Dzięki!

Szata graficzna całkiem wporządku, przypadły mi do gustu blogowe kolory, podoba mi się :) zapraszam do siebie…

Leave A Reply Cancel Reply

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.

Item Added to Cart

You just added

You have item(s) in your cart

• Continue Shopping
• Proceed to Checkout
• All Courses
• Mythbusters: Challenging ST...

Mythbusters: Challenging STEM Misconceptions for High School Students •

• You need a four-year degree to enter a STEM field
• The major you choose decides your whole career
• You can be a math person or a creative person, not both
• Describe at least three strategies to effectively engage high school students in STEM topics
• Identify at least three ways that high school students can utilize STEM ideas and skills in non-traditional STEM pathways
• Compare the differences between at least three kinds of professional engineering job titles

Mythbusters: Challenging STEM Misconceptions for High School Students

Feedback Survey

• Diseases and Injuries
• Family Health
• Weight Management

More Articles

Activities for kids about jesus dying on a cross, salvation activities for kids, things for parents to write in yearbook, galloping activities for children, marigold flower activities for kids, myth buster activities for kids, home science experiments.

• Competitions -- Jamie & Adam Style

DIY Mythbusting Trivia

Mythbuster kits.

The team of Mythbusters on the Discovery Channel TV series uses scientific methods to test the feasibility of commonly assumed assumptions. It's the team's job to confirm the validity of a myth or declare it busted when the evidence just does not support the myth. While the show is entertaining for children and adults alike, it can also spark an interest in science for a child, and you can help to further the interest with myth-busting activities of your own at home.

Find out if you can you really prevent an egg from breaking when you drop it from different heights. Use items such as bubble wrap, paper towels, cotton balls and tape to try to protect the egg. Create an eye-popping geyser from a bottle of diet soda and chewy mints, but ensure that you try this experiment outdoors. Find out why frozen carbon dioxide is called dry ice. Place two dishes side by side and put a regular ice cube on one and a cube of dry ice on another. Predict what will happen and then take a look after 20 to 30 minutes. You should see a puddle of water in place of the regular ice cube and absolutely nothing on the other plate; the dry ice evaporated because it is actually frozen carbon dioxide, not water.

• Find out if you can you really prevent an egg from breaking when you drop it from different heights.

Competitions -- Jamie & Adam Style

Jamie and Adam, part of the Mythbusters team, are always challenging each other to little science-related competitions 1 . If you are entertaining two or more kids at a time, entertain them with some Mythbuster-like challenges while they compete for the title of Mythbuster champion. Find out who can build the tallest tower from gumdrops and toothpicks, or who can make the most folds in a single sheet of plain, white paper. Race toy cars across a miniature racetrack with water guns as the source of locomotion, and make paper or foam airplanes to see whose plane will travel the farthest.

• Jamie and Adam, part of the Mythbusters team, are always challenging each other to little science-related competitions 1.
• Race toy cars across a miniature racetrack with water guns as the source of locomotion, and make paper or foam airplanes to see whose plane will travel the farthest.

For an instant Mythbusters activity without any preparation or mess, create your own trivia of true and false myths. Invest a little bit of time to research some interesting myths, such as will sitting too close to the TV really ruin a child's vision, do ostriches bury their heads in the sand when they are scared, and will touching a frog really give you warts? Write out your trivia questions and then get ready to bust some myths. You can play one-on-one with your child, or divide a group of kids into teams for a trivia challenge. Read a myth aloud to one group and let them guess whether or not it is true, and then read another myth to the other team. The goal of the game is to correctly guess the correct answer – true or false -- for the highest number of myths.

• For an instant Mythbusters activity without any preparation or mess, create your own trivia of true and false myths.
• Read a myth aloud to one group and let them guess whether or not it is true, and then read another myth to the other team.

If you have helped your kiddo with all the myth-buster activities you can think of, it might be time to call in reinforcements. You can pick up a variety of different Mythbusters science kits so your child can continue to explore, examine and investigate 1 . You can choose from a variety of different kits, from learning about the facts and fiction behind automobile collisions to finding out just how their favorite baseball pitcher makes that signature curve ball curve. You can choose a single kit for your child to enjoy, or opt for the entire collection of Mythbuster activities that could keep your child busy for hours.

• If you have helped your kiddo with all the myth-buster activities you can think of, it might be time to call in reinforcements.
• You can choose a single kit for your child to enjoy, or opt for the entire collection of Mythbuster activities that could keep your child busy for hours.

Related Articles

Skimming Activities for Kids

Get to Know You Game for Teens

Compromise Activities for Children

Activities That Teach Kids to Love Others

Meekness Activities for Kids

• Mythbusters Science Fair Book; Samantha Margles
• Steve Spangler Science: Mentos Diet Coke Geyser
• Steve Spangler Science: Awesome Dry Ice Experiments

Rosenya Faith has been working with children since the age of 16 as a swimming instructor and dance instructor. For more than 14 years she has worked as a recreation and skill development leader, an early childhood educator and a teaching assistant, working in elementary schools and with special needs children between 4 and 11 years of age.

• Rating Count
• Price (Ascending)
• Price (Descending)
• Most Recent

Scientific method mythbusters

Mythbusters - The Scientific Method Skills Sheet (EDITABLE)

Mythbusters Video Scientific Method

Mythbusters & the Scientific Method (Power Point / Science / Slides / No Prep)

MythBusters & The Scientific Method Episode Worksheet | Print & Digital

Scientific Method Posters *FREEBIE* ( Mythbusters Theme)

Scientific Method Mythbusters Moon Landing NASA Hoax Lasers hyperlink worksheet

Mythbusters & the Scientific Method

Mythbusters Scientific Method Application Activity

Scientific Method Application: Mythbusters

MythBusters Scientific Method Science Project Assignment Packet

Mythbusters worksheet that covers the Scientific Method !

Mythbusters Scientific Method Video Guide

Scientific Method Diet Coke & Mentos Mythbusters Hyperlinks & worksheet

Mythbusters - Scientific Method WS

DIGITAL Mythbusters Worksheet | The Scientific Method | Scientific Inquiry

Mythbusters Worksheet | The Scientific Method | Scientific Inquiry

Mythbusters Video Sheet with Scientific Method

Mythbusters : Scientific Method !

Mythbusters Scientific Method Activity

The Mythbusters Scientific Method Sheet

Mythbusters Video Analysis Worksheet for Scientific Method

Scientific Method with the Mythbusters !

Mythbusters Scientific Method Mini-book for Lapbook or Interactive Notebook

MythBusters Scientific Method

• We're hiring
• Help & FAQ
• Privacy policy
• Student privacy
• Terms of service
• Tell us what you think