Is the knowledge of the nature of physics impossible without experimentation and proof?

Question

a short answer 2-3 sentences would be fine

Answer 1

Yes, the nature of physics is really not possible to fully describe without experimentation and proof. Observations are made, hypothesis are generated, experiments run to provide data against which the hypothesis is examined, and conclusions generated. This leads to theories which provide a consistent explanation of the observed data...until further data may prove the theory incorrect or not general enough. One set of observations may have many solutions, but when linked with other sets of observations, the set of solutions that satisfy all observations should reduce...but this requires observations implying experimentation and proof.

Answer 2

Knowledge, no. Knowledge can come from books only. Confidence, YES. As an engineer, designing beams in a home, I have to have confidence in the structural section I recommend, or little Tommy gets crushed. Not knowledge.

Theory is just that. Experimentation gives one confidence in the theory, and proof for later professional recommendations. That is why labs are so important in school.

Answer 3

The experiment "valid" the theory.

I think there is a very internal relationship between experiment and theory. I think is necesary to consider both aspets to explain the bahaviour of nature. But only the experiment say if the theory is valid or fail.

Answer 4

First IS Oneness, entire union without discrimination. next is Primal component, the Spirit of introduction, it is usually termed Christ whilst manifested. After it is intimacy of the rational soul. under that are the rational sciences that are proved via the exactness of abstraction of the observable. So to ensure that one to study, one would desire to observe, yet there are termed inner realities via which we study, and it quite is not shown as actual, no, in actuality they're shown to have obvious outcomes without actual reason. they have not given up desire of proving a actual foundation, yet as yet it quite is basically unfounded hypothesis in oftentimes hopes of discrediting the perverse misuse of religion. in fact we are in a position to purely understand that it is under our own individual actuality different than that Oneness communicates Its actuality to us by way of it is Effulgence. till the two the solar shines, and the mirror is organic and clean, mutually as dealing with the solar, no know-how of its mild can take place different than via what different lesser issues mirror to us, and it quite is rather darksome via assessment to the source Itself. via the solar of know-how we see for sure all issues seen, yet none has the eyes to be certain the solar itself unhindered, or unaided... God bless.