After reading a few quips on 'settled science' and 'scientific consensus' I decided a separate thread was warranted. Plus this has been a pet peeve of mine for a while since the word 'Theory' is thrown around even by those that should know better...
So a few basics;
Scientific Law - IS A DESCRIPTION
Scientific Theory - IS AN EXPLANATION
There is no hierarchy. Theories do not graduate to laws and laws are not superior to theories. If all we had were LAWS then we would have a very well DESCRIBED universe but nothing would be EXPLAINED. A hypothesis is essentially an untested theory.
NOTHING in science is PROVEN. I actually had this discussion with a co-worker today... here's a helpful analogy.
I have two dice. You don't know how many sides the dice have... you only get the sum of the roll. Every roll is a test.
2,7,8,3,10,12,7,5,7,4,3,8,2...... ∞
At some point it's obvious that these are two 6 sided dice but you can NEVER prove it. A single # rolled >12 would DISPROVE that theory but the theory can NEVER be proven.... it's effectively SETTLED; Unless you want to be uselessly pedantic in which case NOTHING is 'settled'. Some people become convinced when the probability of it NOT being two 6-sided dice is so low that it becomes absurd to accept any other conclusion. Others will hold out indefinitely because the existence of 6-sided dice threatens their worldview. Politicians courting those people will claim all the numbers aren't yet in and they aren't mathematicians.
None of which changes the fact that;
- the odds are very very high that you do indeed have two 6-sided dice
- you can never say with 100% certainty that the next roll won't be >12 only 99.99999999999999.....% certainty
For further enlightenment I strongly recommend 'Structure of Scientific Revolutions' by Thomas Kuhn
So a few basics;
Scientific Law - IS A DESCRIPTION
Scientific Theory - IS AN EXPLANATION
There is no hierarchy. Theories do not graduate to laws and laws are not superior to theories. If all we had were LAWS then we would have a very well DESCRIBED universe but nothing would be EXPLAINED. A hypothesis is essentially an untested theory.
NOTHING in science is PROVEN. I actually had this discussion with a co-worker today... here's a helpful analogy.
I have two dice. You don't know how many sides the dice have... you only get the sum of the roll. Every roll is a test.
2,7,8,3,10,12,7,5,7,4,3,8,2...... ∞
At some point it's obvious that these are two 6 sided dice but you can NEVER prove it. A single # rolled >12 would DISPROVE that theory but the theory can NEVER be proven.... it's effectively SETTLED; Unless you want to be uselessly pedantic in which case NOTHING is 'settled'. Some people become convinced when the probability of it NOT being two 6-sided dice is so low that it becomes absurd to accept any other conclusion. Others will hold out indefinitely because the existence of 6-sided dice threatens their worldview. Politicians courting those people will claim all the numbers aren't yet in and they aren't mathematicians.
None of which changes the fact that;
- the odds are very very high that you do indeed have two 6-sided dice
- you can never say with 100% certainty that the next roll won't be >12 only 99.99999999999999.....% certainty
For further enlightenment I strongly recommend 'Structure of Scientific Revolutions' by Thomas Kuhn