Newton's Three Laws of Motion Proves Evolution Wrong?

Question

No not really. The three laws of motion don't prove Evolution wrong. But they do provide evidence that science has only a limited understanding of reality that is constantly being rediscovered.

Newtonian Physics is being systematically replaced with quantum physics. This new physics admitts to discontinuity in motion which flies in the face of our newtonian understanding of the universe. Space and all of matter is now theorized to be "quanties" in other words space and matter can not be divided indefinitely.

When I was in school we learned about Newtons three LAWS of motion and the LAW of gravity. They were deemed laws because they were observable definable proofs of themselves. Science gives the definition of a THEORY to something they can't test to be wrong or right, they just think it's the best solution to fit the facts.

Now if what was once considered scientific LAW can be undone then why put so much faith in a THEORY? The THEORY of evolution?

Trouthunter: The definitions of theory and law don't really matter that much though there is a difference in the level of certainty between the two. The fact is science can not be relied upon to be constantly factual. It has flaws because our understanding of the universe if flawed. My question in no way supports creationism, it just asks the question "Could evolution just be misguided?"

Here is a definition of scientific theory according to google.

"An explanation of why and how a specific natural phenomenon occurs. A lot of hypotheses are based on theories. In turn, theories may be redefined as new hypotheses are tested. "

I think it further proves my point.

Answer 1

The plural of quantum would be quanta, not quanties. This bickering over the word theory is silly. It's even sillier when you use it about evolution. The theory is not evolution.. the theory is about the natural selection. It is called the Theory of Evolution by Natural Selection. As with any science every theory stands on the facts that hold it up. If you can prove to other scientists that the theory is wrong so that they can do your test and prove it to themselves that it is wrong then that theory must be changed to fit any new facts.
Einstein's theories did exactly that to Newton's laws. Scientists found that at speed's approaching the speed of light Newton's laws were not sufficient to explain or predict the facts.
A scientific theory is a hypothesis supported by a great deal of evidence which stands the test of time, often tested and never rejected. Note that the general public uses the word theory to imply a lack of knowledge or a guess, just the opposite of the scientific meaning. Darwin's theory of evolution by natural selection is an example of a scientific theory. It has survived scientific scrutiny for more than 130 years and evidence to support it continues to accumulate.

Answer 2

Unfortunately you misunderstand what a scientific law and scientific theory is. A scientific law is simply an observation that something happens (usually expressed as a mathematical equation). A scientific theory explains WHY something happens. And a theory has to be testable or it is not science.

There are few theories in science as tested as Evolution by Natural Selection. But nothing can be proven 100% in science (except in maths), no matter how many hundreds of thousands of pieces of evidence are found that all confirm, or are consistent, with Evolution by NS, just one piece could (theoretically) be found tomorrow which disproves everything. That is how science works. And is why it is not technically correct to say that Evolution by NS is proved.

But Evolution by NS is supported by an overwhelming abundance of evidence, truly enormous, more than any other theory I can think of (I'm not going to summarise it all, you can research it yourself). It is theoretically possible that it could be replaced with a better Theory(s) but in 150 years there hasn't been one and the evidence just gets stronger and stronger (and the Theory would have to explain the copious copious observations of evolution, in the fossil record, and in the modern world - the Theory is just the WHY).

I don't understand why some religious people are so threatened by Evolution by NS (most world-wide aren't). It says nothing about God. All it says is that all the evidence we have indicates that life on Earth descended by Natural Selection from primitive organisms. Does it mention God, or a soul, or the origin of life, or the origin of the universe? No.

Answer 3

No you are incorrect. You should look up the definition of theory to start with. By it's very nature a theory must be testable. A theory is based on testable observations and naturally occurring phenomena. A "law" in science is much the same as a theory, and in fact is based on theories. Newtons "laws" of gravity, and motion still apply today for large scale systems like solar and planetary systems. Quantum Mechanics deals with very small systems like those at the atomic level. Einsteins theory of relativity is what actually took the place of newtons laws.
I am simple pointing out the errors in your question/argument. We are fortunate that the scientific method allows for change as new information becomes available. Evolution has 150 of changes and revisions that have only helped refine and make it better.

Answer 4

A good example of a theory that has been modified is the kinetic theory of gases. In the 17th century Robert Boyle discovered that halving the volume of a fixed volume of gas doubled the pressure. From this the general "Boyle's law" that pressure was inversely proportional to volume was developed. This could be called a theory. From these and other experiments Isaac Newton supposed that a gas was made up mutually repelling particles, but as far as I know took it no further than that. That might also be called a theory, but since he probably had no way of testing, it was really an hypothesis. Hundreds of years later technology had advanced to the point where the pressure volume relation of gases could be tested in extreme conditions and what do you know, the more extreme the conditions the less it followed Boyle's law. So the theory had to be modified. Why was this? Because the gas was made up of particles with a definite volume which could not be compressed, just as Newton had guessed. Charles Darwin's theory was never proved to be true in his life time by him or anyone else. His theory was that new species of organism arise becuse of the modified inheritance from their ancestors. He did not theorise that evolution existed, that was already known to be true. Since that time, the appearance of new species has been observed, so his theory turned out to be true, but he never proved it. I think you should go use a dictionary to look up "theory", "evidence" and "proof" A good one, something like the Concise Oxford.

Answer 5

Science and religion are both philosophy, that's right, philosophy. Both religion and science keep evolving and changing because nature keeps evolving and changing; thus their philosophy keep evolving and changing. Nature is not about answers, nature is about finding them. Both creationism and evolution are one in the same, they are both right and wrong. The true answer is a balance between the two. So why don't creationist try to find God in evolution and evolutionists try to find evolution in creationism? Creationists mostly believe in God and that God is in everything, so why does this conflict even exist? God and evolution are in the details. Seek the truth or get lost in fiction. Still if we knew all the answers, then we would have no reason to look right.

Answer 6

Your question and your follow up info. has a lot of holes.
I agree with trouthunt's observations.
However, we are still struggling with our observations and knowledge of the vast universe. Quantum physics is still being studied...from what physicist Max Planck proposed.
E= hv...v=frequency of the wave in a particle, h is a constant that came to be called Planck's constant. Later scientists came to think of that single bundle of energy as a particle called a photon.
So quanta and the study of it is still in the baby stage.
Newton's laws and along with Einstein's observations of it still apply.
Still the theories of evolution remain theories until they can be proved...creation is more logical.

Answer 7

God vs. Science

God is sitting in Heaven when a scientist says to Him, "Lord, we don't need You anymore. Science has finally figured out a way to create life out of nothing. In other words, we can now do what you did in the beginning."

"Oh, is that so? Tell me," replies God.

"Well," says the scientist, "We can take dirt and form it into the Likeness of You and breathe life into it, thus creating man."

"Well, that's interesting. Show me."

So the scientist bends down to the Earth and starts to mold the soil.

"Oh no, no, no," interrupts God. "Get your own dirt!"

Answer 8

i totally agree.