Simple Basic Theories

[sandnsea]

Science was a looooong time ago.

Are there some basic Theories that are so common that we don't even question them?

Is condensation and rain a Theory? The way tornadoes happen? Snow? Photosynthesis?

I was thinking if we take these common things that are accepted as scientific fact, and apply the scientific Theory to them, then maybe otherwise intelligent people will remember what science class was all about.

Except I don't remember any scientific Theories.

[Bob3]

1. the Theory of gravity

Copernican theory (earth revolves around the sun)

Atomic Theory (things are made of Atoms)

AND SO ON.

[sandnsea]

2. AND SO ON

More please, if you know. Gravity and Copernican Theory are good because they're something that people experience. Staying on earth and day and night. Atomic Theory is too abstract. Are there other theories that are the actual name, like gravity?

Sorry to be so stupid. I actually didn't learn alot of Theories in science.

[ixion]

3. Distinguish between 'Law' and 'Theory'

Laws are proven, Theories are not.

-- the Theory of Relativity
-- The Laws of Thermodyanimcs

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physics

[Pepperbelly]

4. no ...

This is the proper definition of 'theory':

"A set of statements or principles devised to explain a group of facts or phenomena, especially one that has been repeatedly tested or is widely accepted and can be used to make predictions about natural phenomena."

The definition that you used is the sixth definition and not the one in common usage in science environs.

[seasat]

5. Just to add to Pepperbelly's comment...

Laws are theories that have been repeatedly tested over time. They're still theories. Under the scientific method no theory is proven. They are tested to see if they can be disproven. It's an easy mistake to make and one that causes scientists numurous headaches when dealing with the general public. However, it is a very necessary approach in science.

[Zappa]

6. The Theory of Relativity

General Relativity was proven way back in 1919.

A theory is a "plausible or scientifically acceptable general principle or body of principles offered to explain phenomena."

If an idea is unproven or not yet generally accepted, it is a hypothesis.

[rayofreason]

7. wrong distinction

The distinction between a "Law" as in "Newton's Laws" and "Theory" as in "The Theory of Special Relativity" is that before about 1850 these things were called "Laws" (e.g., Faraday's Law) and after 1850 the same kind of thing was called a "Theory" (Maxwell's Theory of Electromagnetism - which includes Gauss's Laws for electricity and magnetism, Ampere's Law, Faraday's Law, Lenz's Law, and Maxwell's displacement current that modified Ampere's Law)

Einstein's Theory of Relativity is on as much firm ground as Newton's Laws (or thermodynamics, for that matter). In fact, Newton's Laws are a special case of relativity, when the speeds are small compared to the speed of light and the curvature of space-time is small.

[hunter]

8. First you have to stop thinking of "facts" and "theories" as nouns.

The great failure of our education system is that many people think of "facts" or "theories" as something they can collect like baseball cards.

But facts and theories are nothing like that. They are more like the letters of an alphabet you can arrange in various ways to describe your thoughts and observations.

Life is certainly not a multiple-choice test where the answers are "True or False" or "A, B, C, D, or E."

The "number two pencil fill in the bubble" mentality is killing us. Our leaders do incredibly dumb-ass things and most people don't object because they can't organize their own theories and experiences into a coherent story. It's not that people are stupid; it's only that they have never learned the discipline.

For example, I have NEVER heard George W. Bush explain anything. Watch him whenever he's not delivering a previously rehearsed speech.

1. Bush's mouth opens.
   
2. A great spew of "facts" comes out.
   
3. He tells you what he wants.
   
4. He pauses with that stupid "serve-me-now" smirk on his face.
   

He does this again, and again, and again. I cannot tolerate it.

Often the facts Bush spews are not based in any sort of reality I can recognize. It as if there is some demented fairy tale playing in his head, and he is grabbing random pieces of it. (If George W. Bush was my kid I would be deeply ashamed and I would move heaven and earth to find him a job where he couldn't hurt anybody...)

But I digress.

Science, and life in general, is always a story about relationships because the human mind organizes everything into stories. It's the way we are built, it's the way we evolved as social creatures.

To begin doing Science the first step is to describe something.

A good example is that we sometimes feel hot, and we sometimes feel cold. We say that in the summer "it is hot," and in the winter "it is cold."

The second step is to measure something. How hot? How cold? Measuring things is rarely a trivial task. The invention of counting, and the invention of rulers and scales and clocks and thermometers were all very significant events in the history of science.

Okay, so we've invented our thermometer. In the winter, when it's all cold and icy outside, our thermometer reads below 32 degrees. In the summer, when it's very hot outside, our thermometer reads above 100 degrees. A nice temperature when you are wearing clothes is 72 degrees. A nice temperature when you step naked out of the shower is 85 degrees.

The third step is to construct a theory, starting with a hypothesis:

What is hot or cold?

Again, this is not a trivial step.

In the early days of the study of temperature it was not clear if "hot" was the thing being measured or if "cold" was the thing that was being measured. Does "hot" mean there is less cold? Or does "cold" mean there is less hot?

Scientists determined, by various experiments, that "cold" was the absence of heat, and that's how the science of thermodynamics was born. That's how human beings learned the "fact" that there could be a total absence of heat, an "absolute zero," at a temperature of negative 273.15 Celsius, or negative 459.67 Farenheit. We call this temperature "Zero Degrees Kelvin" in honor of one of the scientists who determined this.

See how it works? If you know only the fact that "absolute zero" is negative 479.67 Farenheit you really don't know anything, you are not doing science, even if you can fill in the correct bubble on a test.

For this fact to be of any use at all you've got to be able to put it into a story.

If you can explain why this fact is important, and relate it to other "scientific facts," then you are starting to do some science.