6645 Shares

Law vrs theory. like evolution differs from gravity?

Law vrs theory. like evolution differs from gravity? Topic: Examples of hypothesis in science
June 20, 2019 / By Terrie
Question: when will the theory of evolution become the law of evolution. (like the law of gravity) ? i guess my question was not as thought provoking as i hoped. it would seem that the laws (theory?) of gravity has an effect on evolution. the mere fact that there may be a missing link that conquered gravity (erectus...) would be essentially conected to gravitational pull. i guess my point concerns lateral thinking as opposed to linear progression (or am i obfuscating the apparent?) it would seem to me that a theory is a kind of working idea or concept from which one might speculate laterally to laws. for example the downward force that pulls us to the ground is an influence in how the leopard is "designed" and explains why the giraffe hoof has a pad which ,when stepped on, pushes blood up the neck to the brain. i'm thinking the force of gravity may influence evolution. then again walking on watter would be contrary to gravity. a theory is... "a coherent group of general propositions used as principles of explanation for a class of phenomena: Einstein's theory of relativity. " a law is " (in philosophy, science, etc.) a. a statement of a relation or sequence of phenomena invariable under the same conditions. " even Richard Dawkins, a botanist, cannot propose evolution as law as there is no evidence of observable lateral progression in the development of any species, only conjecture that it has occurred.
Best Answer

Best Answers: Law vrs theory. like evolution differs from gravity?

Rosalin Rosalin | 5 days ago
It won't. Scientifically speaking, a theory is GREATER than a law. Theories are the MOST ACCEPTED status that any scientific idea can attain. Laws only explain specific, observable, repeatable events in similar circumstances. They do not posit a mechanism or explanation for the event. Theories do this by encompassing laws and placing/explaining the them in a context with other laws, evidence, facts, models, hypotheses, and observations. For example, there is an Ohm's Law, a Fick's law of diffusion, and a Hopkinson's law...but all of them fall UNDER the umbrella of the electromagnetic theory. The laws serve to support the theory. Also, while Newton did formulate a universal law of gravitation, the larger concept and study of gravity itself is a theory. Newton's law of gravitation states that "every point mass attracts every other point mass by a force pointing along the line intersecting both points. The force is directly proportional to the product of the two masses and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between the point masses." But this only tells us how two bodies will react under the influence of gravity. It does not tell us what gravity is, where gravity comes from, what gives gravity the force it has, etc. The theory of gravity contains all those ideas AND the law of universal gravitation within it. Laws are more like "If A happens, then B will happen." Theories are more like "B will happen BECAUSE..." It is an old misconception that there is some mythical and direct chain of events that says hypotheses become theories and theories become laws, but this is simply untrue. No doubt your teachers taught you incorrect or outdated understandings of science. Most basic science textbooks nowdays correct the old myth of any clear, linear science promotion for ideas. For the record gravity is a theory. The fact that your body is made up of cells is also a "mere" theory (cell theory). It will NEVER become a "law" that you are made of cells. Never. Yet the whole of modern medicine is built upon the idea and you can easily look at your own cells under a microscope. The fact that the moon goes around the earth and that the earth goes around the sun are also scientific theories--because these are known to be absolutely, factually true and "theory" the highest form of scientific acceptance (it is the heliocentric theory, not the heliocentric law--and it never will be). That the axial tilt of the earth causes the seasons is a theory. Nuclear fission is a theory (one so well proven we built one hell of a bomb on it). Electro-magneticism is a theory. Everything being made of atoms is known as atomic theory. That light and sound travel in predictable, controllable, alterable, measurable waves is wave theory. Etc. etc. etc.
👍 98 | 👎 5
Did you like the answer? Law vrs theory. like evolution differs from gravity? Share with your friends

We found more questions related to the topic: Examples of hypothesis in science


Rosalin Originally Answered: Law vrs theory. like evolution differs from gravity?
It won't. Scientifically speaking, a theory is GREATER than a law. Theories are the MOST ACCEPTED status that any scientific idea can attain. Laws only explain specific, observable, repeatable events in similar circumstances. They do not posit a mechanism or explanation for the event. Theories do this by encompassing laws and placing/explaining the them in a context with other laws, evidence, facts, models, hypotheses, and observations. For example, there is an Ohm's Law, a Fick's law of diffusion, and a Hopkinson's law...but all of them fall UNDER the umbrella of the electromagnetic theory. The laws serve to support the theory. Also, while Newton did formulate a universal law of gravitation, the larger concept and study of gravity itself is a theory. Newton's law of gravitation states that "every point mass attracts every other point mass by a force pointing along the line intersecting both points. The force is directly proportional to the product of the two masses and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between the point masses." But this only tells us how two bodies will react under the influence of gravity. It does not tell us what gravity is, where gravity comes from, what gives gravity the force it has, etc. The theory of gravity contains all those ideas AND the law of universal gravitation within it. Laws are more like "If A happens, then B will happen." Theories are more like "B will happen BECAUSE..." It is an old misconception that there is some mythical and direct chain of events that says hypotheses become theories and theories become laws, but this is simply untrue. No doubt your teachers taught you incorrect or outdated understandings of science. Most basic science textbooks nowdays correct the old myth of any clear, linear science promotion for ideas. For the record gravity is a theory. The fact that your body is made up of cells is also a "mere" theory (cell theory). It will NEVER become a "law" that you are made of cells. Never. Yet the whole of modern medicine is built upon the idea and you can easily look at your own cells under a microscope. The fact that the moon goes around the earth and that the earth goes around the sun are also scientific theories--because these are known to be absolutely, factually true and "theory" the highest form of scientific acceptance (it is the heliocentric theory, not the heliocentric law--and it never will be). That the axial tilt of the earth causes the seasons is a theory. Nuclear fission is a theory (one so well proven we built one hell of a bomb on it). Electro-magneticism is a theory. Everything being made of atoms is known as atomic theory. That light and sound travel in predictable, controllable, alterable, measurable waves is wave theory. Etc. etc. etc.
Rosalin Originally Answered: Law vrs theory. like evolution differs from gravity?
No. A law is used to predict the future. A theory in science simply describes how or what caused things to be the way they are. At best the Theory of Evolution would predict that evolution continues even today and has no finished or final step. One thing that some people who oppose the TOE do is mix their definition of theory (something unproven) with the scientific definition of theory (something verified and a reasonable explanation of how things came to be the way they are). If you don't keep those two definitions separate, you will not understand what a scientific theory is. Notice also that scientific laws tell you nothing about how the thing being predicted came about. The law of gravity tells you nothing about gravity, only what will happen if you have two masses separated by a distance, they will accelerate towards each other. It doesn't say how that happens or what makes it happen. Saying gravity does it is no more of an answer than saying God did it. Tells you nothing.

Moreen Moreen
No. A law is used to predict the future. A theory in science simply describes how or what caused things to be the way they are. At best the Theory of Evolution would predict that evolution continues even today and has no finished or final step. One thing that some people who oppose the TOE do is mix their definition of theory (something unproven) with the scientific definition of theory (something verified and a reasonable explanation of how things came to be the way they are). If you don't keep those two definitions separate, you will not understand what a scientific theory is. Notice also that scientific laws tell you nothing about how the thing being predicted came about. The law of gravity tells you nothing about gravity, only what will happen if you have two masses separated by a distance, they will accelerate towards each other. It doesn't say how that happens or what makes it happen. Saying gravity does it is no more of an answer than saying God did it. Tells you nothing.
👍 30 | 👎 4

Lissa Lissa
no one knows wanna know why, becuase theories like atoms are only here to prove people would like to THINK every kinda atom is real just 4 conversation!!! any wierd theory that cannot be proved would love a front page day! to some people!
👍 26 | 👎 3

Lissa Originally Answered: When you say 'The theory of evolution' you do realize?
Because they have to lie in order to make their bullshit fairytales seem more credible by comparison.

If you have your own answer to the question examples of hypothesis in science, then you can write your own version, using the form below for an extended answer.