0
What else can I help you with?
Why aren't the big bang theory and the steady state theory considered scientific laws?
They can't be proven with 100% scientific certainty. No one was there to witness the big bang, so we can't technically say that it definitely happened. And we wouldn't call the Steady State Theory a law, since it has been seriously discounted in recent decades. It is worth adding that when time honored theories become 'laws' it is not because they have be proven with 100% certainty. It is because they have survived the test of time and the test of many, many scientific challenges. Nothing can really be proven with 100% scientific certainty.
What is the comparison between scientific law and scientific theory?
A "law" is just a theory that has been around long enough to inspire a lot of confidence in its chances of being true.By that time, it has been tested by experiments and none has ever found a problem with it.Also by that time, the theory has produced predictions that have been proven accurate by experiments designed to test them.So it begins to be referred to as a "law".But that doesn't mean that it can never be blown to bits. Even at this stage, it may still be found out as only an approximation, or only a part of the story, for example when experimental techniques become more precise. This has actually happened to Newton's "Laws" of motion.
Why have the laws of physic not been rewritten?
The laws of physics have not been rewritten because they accurately describe and predict the behavior of the natural world. These laws have stood the test of time through rigorous testing and experimentation. Any new discoveries are incorporated into existing frameworks rather than completely rewriting them.
In the scientific theory what can you think of as a rule of nature?
In scientific theory, a rule of nature is a fundamental principle that describes how the natural world behaves consistently under certain conditions. These rules are based on observations, experimentation, and mathematical models that help explain and predict natural phenomena. Examples of rules of nature include Newton's laws of motion, the law of gravity, and the laws of thermodynamics.
How was Aristotle's dynamic motion theory proven wrong?
Aristotle's dynamic motion theory was proven wrong with the advancements in physics and the development of Newton's laws of motion. Newton's laws provided a more accurate description of how objects move and interact with each other, which contradicted Aristotle's ideas about motion and force. Additionally, the observations and experiments of scientists like Galileo further disproved Aristotle's theories on motion.
How would you distinguish a scientific theory from from a scientific law?
A scientific law is something that has been proved again and again under experimentation, and is always true. A scientific theory is an educated guess made based off of a group of data that is not proven to be true. For example, Newton's Laws are scientific laws since they have been proven to be always true. The theory of gravity is a scientific theory because gravity itself has not been completely proven to exist.
How do scientific theries differ from scientific laws?
Theories are observations held to be true based on their application to observation and proven scientific laws.
The difference between a scientific theory and a scientific law is that a scientific theory?
a scientific theory is a description of an observed phenomenon while a scientific theory is an explanation of an observed phenomenon
What is the difference Theories and Laws?
Laws have been proven, theories have not
What is the different between scientic theary and scientic law?
A scientific theory is something that has not been 100% proven to work in all situations. A scientific law or principle is a known principle that has been proven to work and affects all situations. There are special circumstances that take place in theory's and laws.
Can a scientific law be proven true?
Scientific laws are generalizations based on observed patterns in nature and cannot be proven true in an absolute sense. They are considered true because they have consistently withstood testing and observation, and have not been contradicted by evidence so far. However, they may be refined or expanded upon by future research and discoveries.
Why aren't the big bang theory and the steady state theory considered scientific laws?
They can't be proven with 100% scientific certainty. No one was there to witness the big bang, so we can't technically say that it definitely happened. And we wouldn't call the Steady State Theory a law, since it has been seriously discounted in recent decades. It is worth adding that when time honored theories become 'laws' it is not because they have be proven with 100% certainty. It is because they have survived the test of time and the test of many, many scientific challenges. Nothing can really be proven with 100% scientific certainty.
Is a scientific hypothesis an absolutely unbreakable law of physics?
No. A hypothesis is a proposed statement in science. When a hypothesis is constantly proven and accepted by the scientific community, it becomes known as a theory. Even a theory is not a LAW of physics. The only laws that exist in science are those that can be proven through math. While unbreakable laws of physics exist, if it cannot be mathematically proven, a scientific hypothesis is not an unbreakable law of physics.
Why is the word law used under certain circumstances and the term theory used in other equally important cases?
Laws are scientiffically proven facts while theories are not considered facts but are not completely disregarded either as they have not yet been proven to be wrong
What is the difference between a scientific law and a fact?
Scientific fact is sometimes wrong from The Bible's perspective Laws are sometimes wrong, as Martin Luther king once said "One has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws." - MLK
What is the difference between a scientific fact theory and a law?
Scientific fact is sometimes wrong from the Bible's perspective Laws are sometimes wrong, as martin luther king once said "One has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws." - MLK
Can scientific laws be change by a vote?
No, scientific laws are based on empirical evidence and are not subject to change through a vote. They represent established principles that accurately describe natural phenomena and are universally accepted within the scientific community. Changes to scientific laws are made through rigorous research and experimentation, not by popular vote.
