When is a theory a theory and not just a theory?

  • Thread starter Thread starter EMFsmith
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Theory
AI Thread Summary
A scientific theory is a hypothesis confirmed through repeated experimentation and observation, exemplified by Newton's theory of gravity. The Big Bang is often misunderstood; it is not a theory itself but a feature of General Relativity, which serves as the theoretical framework explaining it. A theory unifies principles that explain a body of facts, but it is not conclusively proven, as science relies on evidence rather than absolute certainty. The distinction in terminology can lead to public confusion about the validity of different theories. Ultimately, theories are accepted based on strong evidence from various fields, emphasizing the importance of understanding the underlying physics rather than just the labels.
EMFsmith
Messages
32
Reaction score
0
Ok so a theory in science is a hypotheses that has been confirmed through repeated
experiment and/or observation (e.g., Newton’s theory of
gravity.)

So what's the deal with the Big Bang Theory and String Theory?

Are these not classed as scientific theories or is it to do with the wording maybe, its position in the sentence?

Cheers
 
Physics news on Phys.org
A theory, to put it simply, gives a mathematical formalism to an idea. F=kx is Hooke's law, i.e. a theory that describes the mechanics of the force exerted on a spring.

A theory doesn't make it "weak" nor does it mean that it is well-verified. One needs to fully understand not only the physics, but also the surrounding "atmosphere" within the field to know the degree of validity of a theory. That's why the general public is often confused on why a "theory" in one case is well-accepted, while another "theory" isn't. We don't put that much emphasis on the labels. We put more emphasis on the physics.

Zz.
 
EMFsmith said:
So what's the deal with the Big Bang Theory
The Big Bang isn't a theory. The theory for the Big Bang is General Relativity. The Big Bang is a feature of a specific solution to the Einstein Field Equations in GR. This solution is called the FLRW metric, and it is the solution that seems to best describe the universe in GR.
 
Wiki says:

Definitively speaking, a theory is a unifying principle that explains a body of facts and the laws based on them. In other words, it is an explanation to a set of observations. Additionally, in contrast with a theorem the statement of the theory is generally accepted only in some tentative fashion as opposed to regarding it as having been conclusively established."

So a theory is generally accepted but not 100% proven?
 
EMFsmith said:
Wiki says:

Definitively speaking, a theory is a unifying principle that explains a body of facts and the laws based on them. In other words, it is an explanation to a set of observations. Additionally, in contrast with a theorem the statement of the theory is generally accepted only in some tentative fashion as opposed to regarding it as having been conclusively established."

So a theory is generally accepted but not 100% proven?

There is no 100% proven in science, only in maths. In science we have evidence that indicates what is true and what is not. The more evidence you have (especially strong evidence from a variety of unrelated fields) the stronger the hypothesis. Theories tend to be things that are true beyond reasonable doubt but we are using English and unfortunately we use the same word to mean different things.
 
Cheers ryan that's clears things up for me.
 
DaleSpam said:
The Big Bang isn't a theory. The theory for the Big Bang is General Relativity. The Big Bang is a feature of a specific solution to the Einstein Field Equations in GR. This solution is called the FLRW metric, and it is the solution that seems to best describe the universe in GR.

Really? I never knew this. That explains a lot lol.
 
Back
Top