mattstheman972
New member
A law and a theory are equally supported. The difference is that a law expresses some fact mathematically while a theory explains the concepts behind it.
Massive objects warp spacetime (Theory - General Relativity)
GMM/r^2 = F (Law - Universal Gravitation)
Laws and theories are very well supported by countless measurements and observations. When we move from one theory to another, we only improve upon our understanding of the physical world. For example, we move from Newton's laws of motion to special relativity. The latter more accurately describes reality as we observe it.
Science itself is not a religion. The theories and laws we establish are based on empirical evidence and observations. For that reason, we can say that we know our theories because they are justified.
Evolution can be observed. There are the short term examples such as breeding fruit flies in a lab and long term examples such as an extensive fossil record.
Evolution does not violate the second law of thermodynamics. First of all, the second law of thermodynamics describes entropy which has a well known mathematical description, furthermore even as organisms have evolved, they release heat as they go through their life processes. When you consider a system such as an evolving organism, you have to consider all of the processes within it.
If we're going to discuss science, please don't be ignorant towards it.
@ Chicha:
Interpretations of Quantum Mechanics falls more under Philosophy, imo. It only tries to make intuitive sense of the weird predictions caused by quantum mechanics. Quantum Theorists on the other hand are more concerned with how nature actually works rather than how we'd like to visualize it working.
@Anthony h:
Let's have a discussion about facts, shall we? I'm simply sharing with you some facts that are universally accepted by the scientific community. There is good reason that so many people accept these. It's because they're all based on well documented observations (unlike religion which is based on fear). We know these facts through evidence and observations as I've described. Certainly we can't be 100% certain about any scientific theory but we can say that it accurately describes how the world works according to our observations. For you to call me arrogant is plain ignorance. For you to not accept these incredibly well supported facts is complete nonsense! We will not have the "maturity and respect" to disagree. There's nothing to disagree about! We KNOW this is true.
Dude.. you need to go back and do some reading. Newton's universal law of gravitation is not a law. It does not describe the precession of the perihelion of Mercury. You don't prove by example... you only DISprove by example. The only place you ever have absolute law is in pure mathematics. All other knowledge is of a provisional nature. As for the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics people seem to forget that you can indeed bring about an exceptionally high degree of order of you are allowed to do work on the system. Time evolution towards disorder is only part of the interpretation. Your statement about quantum mechanics is cyclical and somewhat amusing. Your last sentence clearly indicates you don't know what a "model" is or how they fit into scientific discovery.
General Relativity IMproved upon that law and was able to accurately account for the perihelion of mercury's precession.
Yes, all other knowledge is of a provisional nature. But I said that when I said that one theory builds on ano
Massive objects warp spacetime (Theory - General Relativity)
GMM/r^2 = F (Law - Universal Gravitation)
Laws and theories are very well supported by countless measurements and observations. When we move from one theory to another, we only improve upon our understanding of the physical world. For example, we move from Newton's laws of motion to special relativity. The latter more accurately describes reality as we observe it.
Science itself is not a religion. The theories and laws we establish are based on empirical evidence and observations. For that reason, we can say that we know our theories because they are justified.
Evolution can be observed. There are the short term examples such as breeding fruit flies in a lab and long term examples such as an extensive fossil record.
Evolution does not violate the second law of thermodynamics. First of all, the second law of thermodynamics describes entropy which has a well known mathematical description, furthermore even as organisms have evolved, they release heat as they go through their life processes. When you consider a system such as an evolving organism, you have to consider all of the processes within it.
If we're going to discuss science, please don't be ignorant towards it.
@ Chicha:
Interpretations of Quantum Mechanics falls more under Philosophy, imo. It only tries to make intuitive sense of the weird predictions caused by quantum mechanics. Quantum Theorists on the other hand are more concerned with how nature actually works rather than how we'd like to visualize it working.
@Anthony h:
Let's have a discussion about facts, shall we? I'm simply sharing with you some facts that are universally accepted by the scientific community. There is good reason that so many people accept these. It's because they're all based on well documented observations (unlike religion which is based on fear). We know these facts through evidence and observations as I've described. Certainly we can't be 100% certain about any scientific theory but we can say that it accurately describes how the world works according to our observations. For you to call me arrogant is plain ignorance. For you to not accept these incredibly well supported facts is complete nonsense! We will not have the "maturity and respect" to disagree. There's nothing to disagree about! We KNOW this is true.
Dude.. you need to go back and do some reading. Newton's universal law of gravitation is not a law. It does not describe the precession of the perihelion of Mercury. You don't prove by example... you only DISprove by example. The only place you ever have absolute law is in pure mathematics. All other knowledge is of a provisional nature. As for the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics people seem to forget that you can indeed bring about an exceptionally high degree of order of you are allowed to do work on the system. Time evolution towards disorder is only part of the interpretation. Your statement about quantum mechanics is cyclical and somewhat amusing. Your last sentence clearly indicates you don't know what a "model" is or how they fit into scientific discovery.
General Relativity IMproved upon that law and was able to accurately account for the perihelion of mercury's precession.
Yes, all other knowledge is of a provisional nature. But I said that when I said that one theory builds on ano