What’s the difference between a scientific law and theory? - Matt Anticole | Summary and Q&A

TL;DR

Scientific laws predict what happens, while theories explain why things happen; theories are more flexible and subject to change.

Key Insights

• 🌌 Scientific laws predict the results of certain initial conditions, while theories provide explanations about why things happen as they do.
• 📚 Laws predict what happens, while theories propose why it happens.
• 💡 The development of a theory often triggers progress on a law, but a theory will never become a law.
• 🌐 Johannes Kepler developed three laws of planetary motion while trying to find support for his theory of harmonics, but gravity replaced his theory.
• 🔄 Laws usually resist change, while theories may compete to supply the best explanation and can be revised or replaced.
• 🧪 Scientists favor theories that can explain most data and successfully predict new phenomena.
• 💭 Some theories have little experimental evidence, while others, like the Big Bang, evolution, and climate change, have endured years of confirmation.
• 🔬 Better theories lead to new discoveries, but the scientific community has been wrong before; however, even incorrect theories have value.
• ❓ Scientific theories are not infallible but can be challenged and improved, while laws work without understanding the underlying mechanisms.
• 🌍 Science needs both laws and theories to understand the whole picture and avoid unchallenged dogma.

Transcript

Chat with a friend about an established scientific theory and she might reply, "Well, that's just a theory." But a conversation about an established scientific law rarely ends with, "Well, that's just a law." Why is that? What is the difference between a theory and a law, and is one better? Scientific laws and theories have different jobs to do. A... Read More

Questions & Answers

Q: Why do scientific laws resist change more than theories?

Scientific laws are based on empirical evidence and would not have been adopted if they did not fit the data. Therefore, they are more resistant to change as they have already been confirmed by numerous experiments and observations.

Q: How do scientists determine which theory to accept?

Scientists tend to favor the theory that can explain the most data and has predictive power for previously unobserved phenomena. However, there may still be gaps in our understanding, and further research is often conducted to refine or challenge existing theories.

Q: Can incorrect theories still have value?

Yes, even incorrect theories have value. Discredited theories often pave the way for new discoveries and advancements. For example, alchemy eventually led to the birth of modern chemistry, and medicine made progress before the roles of bacteria and viruses were fully understood.

Q: Why is it important to challenge and revise scientific theories?

Challenging and revising scientific theories is crucial to prevent science from becoming stagnant and dogmatic. The vulnerability of theories to better explanations allows for the progress and development of new ideas and theories.

Summary & Key Takeaways

• Scientific laws predict the results of specific initial conditions, while theories provide the logical explanation for why things happen as they do.

• Laws are more rigid and resist change, while theories are adaptable and subject to modification based on new evidence.

• Theories often compete with each other to provide the best explanation, and they are accepted based on their ability to explain data and predict new phenomena.