Discussion Forums > The Lounge

An individual who screws up the term, "Theory"... / "Proof"?

<< < (5/13) > >>

mizore:
Yes, such as the law of angular momentum is not inapplicable in any known instance.  The only possible sense I can make of you rolling your eyes to laws being indisputable would be under an entirely new set of physics we have yet to discover... which has no impact on the relevancy and truth of the law in our known universe.

Perhaps you could explain why you think this way?

JoonasTo:
I think you guys are misunderstanding me somewhere along the way because I agree with your definition of law and theory.

relic2279:
People often mix up the definition of a theory and the scientific definition of theory.

Theories will always stay theories. They never become laws. A theory remains a theory until there is any evidence against it.

fohfoh:

--- Quote ---http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_theory ...

Quote


According to the United States National Academy of Sciences,

Some scientific explanations are so well established that no new evidence is likely to alter them. The explanation becomes a scientific theory. In everyday language a theory means a hunch or speculation. Not so in science. In science, the word theory refers to a comprehensive explanation of an important feature of nature supported by facts gathered over time. Theories also allow scientists to make predictions about as yet unobserved phenomena.

A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on a body of facts that have been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experiment. Such fact-supported theories are not "guesses" but reliable accounts of the real world. The theory of biological evolution is more than "just a theory." It is as factual an explanation of the universe as the atomic theory of matter or the germ theory of disease. Our understanding of gravity is still a work in progress. But the phenomenon of gravity, like evolution, is an accepted fact.


As far as I am concerned, The Theory of The Big Bang and The Theory Evolution fall into this definition. A Scientific Theory does not require proof because there is overwhelming evidence that is consistent with the postulates of the theory. An hypothesis on the other hand need to be tested and proven. And notice that even for Tunguska event, there are not scientific theories that explain the event, there are simply "speculative hypotheses". Saying that "That's what makes a [scientific] theory a [everyday] theory" is just a fallacy.

That not all the details of the Big Bang Theory have been worked out doesn't undermine the validity of the theory. Is there a possibility that the theory is wrong? There is, but it is not remotely near to the uncertainty that you imply it to be.

Lastly, I am not sure what do you mean by "what you are trying to pass off as true is essentially false". If by THAT you mean the Theory of Evolution or The Big Bang Theory, I think they are very true... more true than the existence of God, Creationism, the Bible or any supernatural religious claim.


--- End quote ---
Wait wtf? Did someone pull another "pluto" issue here?

Really going to need your guy's help on this one. My brain is too tired to think properly.


Wait wait wait... I think this guy is fucking up the lines between proof as in evidence to support the "statement" and proof as in details regarding the theory. But even then... WTF? Fucker threw a money wrench into the gears of the machine!

* fohfoh brain clicks a few times and dies

Ixarku:
Maybe I'm off-base here, but I always thought that, by definition, a scientific theory makes testable predictions.... and if those predictions are shown to be true, that's the scientifically accepted "proof" that the theory is valid.

Or, to put it another way, just because you can't reproduce something in a laboratory under controlled conditions does NOT mean that evidence supporting a theory's validity does not exist.  Seems to me that the quoted person is getting hung up on the word "proof".

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page