Difference between revisions of "Scientific theory"

From Conservapedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 12: Line 12:
  
 
No scientific theory can be said to be absolutely true, but a successful theory is most consistent with the actual behavior of the universe.  When a phenomenon is discovered that is inconsistent with the prevailing theory, the theory is either revised or thrown out entirely.  An example of this is  [[Newtonian mechanics]]--while Newton's 3 laws of motion provide extremely accurate descriptions/predictions of the behavior of medium-sized objects at low speeds, they are inconsistent with the behavior of very large, very fast, or very small objects.  Newtonian mechanics has been shown to be a limiting case of the [[theory of relativity]] (in the limit where velocity goes to 0) and [[quantum mechanics]] (in the limit where [[Planck's constant]] goes to 0, essentially the limit of large objects).  Usually a theory which is inconsistent with some experimental evidence is not completely falsified; it is instead shown to be a simplified version of a more complete theory.
 
No scientific theory can be said to be absolutely true, but a successful theory is most consistent with the actual behavior of the universe.  When a phenomenon is discovered that is inconsistent with the prevailing theory, the theory is either revised or thrown out entirely.  An example of this is  [[Newtonian mechanics]]--while Newton's 3 laws of motion provide extremely accurate descriptions/predictions of the behavior of medium-sized objects at low speeds, they are inconsistent with the behavior of very large, very fast, or very small objects.  Newtonian mechanics has been shown to be a limiting case of the [[theory of relativity]] (in the limit where velocity goes to 0) and [[quantum mechanics]] (in the limit where [[Planck's constant]] goes to 0, essentially the limit of large objects).  Usually a theory which is inconsistent with some experimental evidence is not completely falsified; it is instead shown to be a simplified version of a more complete theory.
 +
 +
[[Evolution]] is another excellent example. Most scientists consider Evolution to be both a fact and a theory. Of course this has inevitably resulted in glaring misapprehensions because of the terminology. Unfortunately this can prelude constructive discussion. Scientists distinguish between the following two premises:
 +
 +
#Almost all scientists unilaterally believe that [[fossils]] indicate that the diversity of life came into being gradually over hundreds of millions of years (an assertion of ''fact'') and that all species evolved from a common ancestor. They also assert the change in allelic (alternate forms of genes) frequencies that occur within populations over time. These are the facts that have been observed. 
 +
#Darwin and his successors explain this apparent progression by various scientific theories. What is often misunderstood by creationists or opponents of Evolution is that scientists are unsure of the exact '''mechanism''' that drives evolution. In other words, how Evolution occurs. One such mechanism is Darwin's theory of [[Natural Selection]]. Over time, this theory was combined with Mendelian genetics and other scientific disciplines (e.g. Paleontology, Geology, Biology, and Molecular Genetics) to form the theory of [[Modern Synthesis]]. This is the current and preeminent theory existing to explain the mechanism of Evolution today. [http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/evolution-fact.html] [http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/evolution-definition.html]
  
 
== Common usage ==  
 
== Common usage ==  

Revision as of 21:29, August 30, 2007

A scientific theory is more substantial than a conjecture or hypothesis, but may not be verified as consistent with empirical data. [1]

It is a plausible and consistent explanation for observable phenomena.

To be considered scientific, a theory must be falsifiable. This means that there must be some way to do experiments that could counter the theory's predictions, thus disproving the current theory. [2]

Generally accepted scientific theories have been tested and survived over time, have evolved when appropriate, and modified toward consistency with newly discovered data, have not been shown to be false and can make predictions about natural phenomena. [3] Scientific theories can sometimes be used as the basis for industrial and technical developments.

A scientific theory does not necessarily have to have strong experimental support or accepted by the scientific community. Scientists often refer to untested theories and competing theories. Theories can be extremely well-confirmed, such as conservation of energy, or speculative, such as String Theory.

No scientific theory can be said to be absolutely true, but a successful theory is most consistent with the actual behavior of the universe. When a phenomenon is discovered that is inconsistent with the prevailing theory, the theory is either revised or thrown out entirely. An example of this is Newtonian mechanics--while Newton's 3 laws of motion provide extremely accurate descriptions/predictions of the behavior of medium-sized objects at low speeds, they are inconsistent with the behavior of very large, very fast, or very small objects. Newtonian mechanics has been shown to be a limiting case of the theory of relativity (in the limit where velocity goes to 0) and quantum mechanics (in the limit where Planck's constant goes to 0, essentially the limit of large objects). Usually a theory which is inconsistent with some experimental evidence is not completely falsified; it is instead shown to be a simplified version of a more complete theory.

Evolution is another excellent example. Most scientists consider Evolution to be both a fact and a theory. Of course this has inevitably resulted in glaring misapprehensions because of the terminology. Unfortunately this can prelude constructive discussion. Scientists distinguish between the following two premises:

  1. Almost all scientists unilaterally believe that fossils indicate that the diversity of life came into being gradually over hundreds of millions of years (an assertion of fact) and that all species evolved from a common ancestor. They also assert the change in allelic (alternate forms of genes) frequencies that occur within populations over time. These are the facts that have been observed.
  2. Darwin and his successors explain this apparent progression by various scientific theories. What is often misunderstood by creationists or opponents of Evolution is that scientists are unsure of the exact mechanism that drives evolution. In other words, how Evolution occurs. One such mechanism is Darwin's theory of Natural Selection. Over time, this theory was combined with Mendelian genetics and other scientific disciplines (e.g. Paleontology, Geology, Biology, and Molecular Genetics) to form the theory of Modern Synthesis. This is the current and preeminent theory existing to explain the mechanism of Evolution today. [2] [3]

Common usage

Evolutionists frequently argue that the word "theory" means very different things to scientists and non-scientists. For example, a PBS TV show says: [4]

When we use the word "theory" in everyday life, we usually mean an idea or a guess, but the word has a much different meaning in science. This video examines the vocabulary essential for understanding the nature of science and evolution and illustrates how evolution is a powerful, well-supported scientific explanation for the relatedness of all life.

The American Museum of Natural History exhibit on Darwin says: [5]

In everyday use, the word "theory" often means an untested hunch, or a guess without supporting evidence. But for scientists, a theory has nearly the opposite meaning. A theory is a well-substantiated explanation of an aspect of the natural world that can incorporate laws, hypotheses and facts.

In science a theory is something that ties together facts. For example, an apple falling to the ground when you let go of it is a fact. From this we can hypothesize that there is some force pulling it down. The set of observations and mathematical formulae that explain how this force works, and the experiments which demonstrate that those observations and formulae are correct is called the Theory of Gravity.

Notes and references

  1. ↑ For example, scientists may refer to phlogiston theory or ether theory, even though empirical verification was lacking.
  2. ↑ "A theory not only explains known facts; it also allows scientists to make predictions of what they should observe if a theory is true. Scientific theories are testable. New evidence should be compatible with a theory. If it isn't, the theory is refined or rejected." [1]
  3. ↑ http://www.thefreedictionary.com/theory
  4. ↑ http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/library/11/2/e_s_1.html
  5. ↑ http://www.amnh.org/exhibitions/darwin/evolution/theory.php