they test the teory over and over again
2006-09-10 15:09:01
·
answer #1
·
answered by ladybug_ref 2
·
0⤊
1⤋
Generally, it works like this.
Someone has an educated guess about how something works. That is a hypothesis.
They set up some way of testing the hypothesis to show that it is either (probably) correct or (probably) not correct.
If the experiment shows that their hypothesis is wrong, then they change the hypothesis.
Then they try experiments to show that the changed hypothesis is correct.
After a while they have a lot of experiments that show how things work, and a hypothesis that has been corrected over and over until it is pretty reliable.
In science we call a hypothesis that has a lot of good evidence behind it, a theory.
Most ofthe stuff we do in science is theories.
Why isnt it a Law...
"Laws" are theories that have been test a gazillion times and corrected and improved until they are very, very reliable and dependable. They are so reliable that we can depend on them when we engineer airplanes, bridges, chemical plants, etc.
We have the Law of Gravity, the Law of Conservation of Energy, etc.
Although someone suggested that it is really a Law, I dont think evolution can be regarded as a law yet, because although there is a huge amount of evidence for it, jsut about all biologists are convinced that it is correct, and there is no other competing theory that has anywhere even remotely near as much evidence, there are still some questions about it that are not completely answered.
Perhaps there will be a way to express the ideas of evolution as a law at some point in the future. I wouldnt be surprised. But we are not quite there yet. People who criticize evolution can be helpful because they often point out little unanswered questions about the theory of evolution. Then when the scientists check it out, they find out something about evolution that they didnt know before, and that makes the theory even stronger. One of the signs of having a correct theory is that the more you look at it, the more correct it seems. THat is definitely happening with the theory of Evolution.
2006-09-11 13:29:17
·
answer #2
·
answered by matt 7
·
0⤊
2⤋
It doesn't, with few exceptions.
A scientific theory is roughly the equivalent of a scientific law, but often a theory acts as a model that accounts for observation, while a law is an explanation of something more simple. Some fields of science use the "theory" terminology and some use "law". Some use both. They both describe very similar concepts. The meaning of both of these words is highly dependent on both the context and field of science in which it is being used. .
I quote from Wikipedia:
"Depending on the context, an extremely well-confirmed theory may allow the terms "theory" and "law" to be used interchangeably without any objection by experts familiar with the current state of the research"
Here is a reasonably good definition of theory and law:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_theories
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_law
I do not always consider Wikipedia to be a reliable source, but because the most commonly accepted definition of these terms is more likely to be found in a source of knowledge of the commons, so to speak, I consider Wikipedia to be worthwile here.
You might want to read the discussion page of Wikipedia's articles to appreciate how hard it really is to define theory and law in a way that makes them different.
2006-09-14 14:26:06
·
answer #3
·
answered by carbonates 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
A THEORY CANNOT BECOME A LAW, they are two completely different things.
A SCIENTIFIC LAW describes an event. For example, The Law of Gravity states that a force exists between two objects. It says nothing about WHY this happens.
A SCIENTIFIC THEORY states WHY these things happen. For instance, Einstein says that large masses cause space-time to warp, which causes a gravitational field.
So remember, Laws DESCRIBE, theories EXPLAIN. They cannot interchange.
2006-09-10 15:30:09
·
answer #4
·
answered by cushdogjr 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
When it is universally accepted in the scientific community. This usually occurs when it has been tested and re-tested and therefore little or no doubt exists that it is fact. An example is evolution, which even so, many deluded people believe is still a theory.
2006-09-10 15:13:37
·
answer #5
·
answered by David S 3
·
0⤊
2⤋
A theory becomes law when it becomes a proven fact. A theory is just a hypothesis.
2006-09-10 15:12:26
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
War.
No, seriously...
One group of scientists claim one thing...
A second group claims another.
A third group sit back and watch as #1 & #2 duke it out.
The winners/survivors are shot, and the #3 group decides the fate of the theory.
Sometimes, though, they choose by picking a winner out of the hat. But, then there are others in the group who suggest that they measure the spilt blood to see who bled more, cause surely they had more faith for their side.
But, this leads to another conflict, where as a war breaks out.
One group of scientists claim one thing...
A second group claims another.
A third group sit back and watch as #1 & #2 duke it out.
The winners/survivors are shot, and the #3 group decides the fate of the theory...
2006-09-10 15:39:13
·
answer #7
·
answered by ICG 5
·
0⤊
1⤋
Through empirical evidence. Theories must be successfully tested repeatedly under controlled conditions.
2006-09-10 15:18:17
·
answer #8
·
answered by Wait a Minute 4
·
1⤊
1⤋
When empirical evidence proves the theory.
2006-09-11 07:27:19
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
we find an equation for it.
2006-09-10 15:11:46
·
answer #10
·
answered by the redcuber 6
·
0⤊
1⤋