background preloader

What is a Scientific Theory?

What is a Scientific Theory?
A scientific theory is a specific type of theory used in the scientific method. The term "theory" can mean something different, depending on whom you ask. "The way that scientists use the word 'theory' is a little different than how it is commonly used in the lay public," said Jaime Tanner, a professor of biology at Marlboro College. The process of becoming a scientific theory Every scientific theory starts as a hypothesis. Tanner further explained that a scientific theory is the framework for observations and facts. Theory basics The University of California, Berkley defines a theory as "a broad, natural explanation for a wide range of phenomena. Any scientific theory must be based on a careful and rational examination of the facts. An important part of scientific theory includes statements that have observational consequences. The evolution of a scientific theory A scientific theory is not the end result of the scientific method; theories can be proven or rejected, just like hypotheses. Related:  Rhetoric and Philosophy

Intelligent Design No. The theory of intelligent design is simply an effort to empirically detect whether the "apparent design" in nature acknowledged by virtually all biologists is genuine design (the product of an intelligent cause) or is simply the product of an undirected process such as natural selection acting on random variations. Creationism typically starts with a religious text and tries to see how the findings of science can be reconciled to it. Intelligent design starts with the empirical evidence of nature and seeks to ascertain what inferences can be drawn from that evidence. Unlike creationism, the scientific theory of intelligent design does not claim that modern biology can identify whether the intelligent cause detected through science is supernatural. Honest critics of intelligent design acknowledge the difference between intelligent design and creationism.

What is a Law in Science? Definition of Scientific Law While scientific theories and laws are both based on hypotheses, a scientific theory is an explanation of the observed phenomenon, while a scientific law is a description of an observed phenomenon. Kepler's Laws of Planetary Motion, for example, describe the motions of planets but do not provide an explanation for their movements. Both scientific laws and theories are supported by a large body of empirical data; both help unify a particular field of scientific study; and both are widely accepted by the vast majority of scientists within a discipline. While a scientific theory can become a scientific law, it does not happen often and each process has a revered and separate purpose as part of the scientific method. A common misconception is that a theory becomes a law after a certain amount of data has accumulated. Scientific laws are typically applied to a specific discipline such as biology, physics or chemistry. Many scientific laws can be boiled down to a mathematical equation. Related:

Text : Is Gravity a Theory or a Law? This week's experiment comes from a recent question, wanting to know whether gravity is a law or a theory. That question brings up so many more questions that I thought it would be fun to explore. To try this, you will need: - an object to drop. OK, pick an object that will not break, dent the floor, cause a mess, or get either of us in trouble. Actually, we should be talking about both. In the language of science, the word "law" describes an analytic statement. We can use Newton's Law of Universal Gravitation to calculate how strong the gravitational pull is between the Earth and the object you dropped, which would let us calculate its acceleration as it falls, how long it will take to hit the ground, how fast it would be going at impact, how much energy it will take to pick it up again, etc. While the law lets us calculate quite a bit about what happens, notice that it does not tell us anything about why it happens. Have a wonder-filled week. Home - Process of Science - What is Science?

Why women leave academia and why universities should be worried | Higher Education Network | Guardian Professional Young women scientists leave academia in far greater numbers than men for three reasons. During their time as PhD candidates, large numbers of women conclude that (i) the characteristics of academic careers are unappealing, (ii) the impediments they will encounter are disproportionate, and (iii) the sacrifices they will have to make are great. This is the conclusion of The chemistry PhD: the impact on women's retention, a report for the UK Resource Centre for Women in SET and the Royal Society of Chemistry. In this report, the results of a longitudinal study with PhD students in chemistry in the UK are presented. Men and women show radically different developments regarding their intended future careers. At the beginning of their studies, 72% of women express an intention to pursue careers as researchers, either in industry or academia. By the third year, the proportion of men planning careers in research had dropped from 61% to 59%.

Scientific Studies: Scientific Method Learning about the scientific method is almost like saying that you are learning how to learn. The scientific method is a process used by scientists to study the world around them. It can also be used to test whether any statement is accurate. You can use the scientific method to study a leaf, a dog, an ocean, or the entire Universe. We all have questions about the world. Just about everything starts with a question. So you've got a scientist. As more questions are asked, scientists build a foundation of answers. The whole process allows the world to advance, evolve, and grow. Experimental evidence is used to confirm the answers in science. Scientists start with general observations and then make a hypothesis. Once you have a scientific hypothesis, the fun can begin. It is very important that the experiment is objective. So what about that first hypothesis? There are different terms used to describe scientific ideas based on the amount of confirmed experimental evidence.

Misconceptions This list was compiled by Anne E. Egger, Stanford University, as part of a collaboration between Visionlearning and the SERC Pedagogic Service, and includes the products of a July 2009 workshop on Teaching the Process of Science. Students hold a wide variety of misconceptions about the process of science that range from the nature of scientific knowledge to what scientists themselves are actually like. In addition, there are many aspects of the process of science that they know nothing about - they are missing conceptions about things like the role of the scientific community. The following list of student misconceptions and missing conceptions was compiled from comments submitted by college faculty and high school teachers who participated in the 2009 Process of Science workshop. The overarching misconception that students hold is that science isn't a process at all - it's just a bunch of facts. The scientific method The nature of uncertainty and change in scientific knowledge

University of Venus | GenX women on work, life, and higher education Position Statement: The Nature of Science Preamble All those involved with science teaching and learning should have a common, accurate view of the nature of science. Science is characterized by the systematic gathering of information through various forms of direct and indirect observations and the testing of this information by methods including, but not limited to, experimentation. The principal product of science is knowledge in the form of naturalistic concepts and the laws and theories related to those concepts. Declaration The National Science Teachers Association endorses the proposition that science, along with its methods, explanations and generalizations, must be the sole focus of instruction in science classes to the exclusion of all non-scientific or pseudoscientific methods, explanations, generalizations and products. The following premises are important to understanding the nature of science. Scientific knowledge is simultaneously reliable and tentative. References Moore, J. 1993. National Academy of Sciences (1998).

The Buddhist Concept of the Human Being: From the Viewpoint of the Philosophy of the Soka Gakkai | Resource Center By Dr. Mikio MatsuokaResearcher, Institute of Oriental PhilosophyHead of Doctrinal Studies, Association of Reformist Priests [Published in The Journal of Oriental Studies, Vol 15, 2005] Introduction Daisaku Ikeda, president of the Soka Gakkai International, in a dialogue with world-renowned sociologist of religion Bryan Wilson, points out that modern social thought originating in the West retains vestiges of a Christian worldview. Ikeda asserts that even today, when belief in a Christian God has waned, national and ideological causes have taken the place of God, with mass slaughter often being justified and glorified in the names of those causes. That said, however, a fundamental theoretical question remains. Further, it should be noted that the term "subjectivity," which forms a keyword in this paper, is employed by the author in a different sense from the concept of subjectivity in modern philosophy and existentialist doctrine. Buddhism as a human-centered religion 2.

Related: