[_xhok]

Somewhat related: I've found in my general experiences that many people don't know what a scientific theory is. They think it means a guess. For example, a lot of people I've talked to think the Big Bang "Theory" is a work of fiction someone invented.

I've found that among a lot of the people I talk to there's this severe, fundamental lack of understanding around how science works. Not a lack of scientific knowledge per se; just a misunderstanding of science's modus operandi.

[Mz]

I once explained to my (very argumentative) ex that when most people use words like "hypothesis" or "theory" they basically mean "guess." He was shocked and then said something like "that explains a lot of conversations I have had..." Of course, he meant their scientific definition, not remotely what most people meant when arguing with him.

[vezzy-fnord]

Indeed, this is the reason why there is still so much backlash and state suppression of the highly established fact that is the theory of evolution.

Equivocation on top of religious biases.

[sirtroll]

do you know why is it called theory instead of theorem,lemma or law?

[aortega]

>I've found in my general experiences that many people don't know what a scientific theory is. They think it means a guess.

Well they are correct.

[jballanc]

Fact: In science, an observation that has been repeatedly confirmed.

Law: A descriptive generalization about how some aspect of the natural world behaves under stated circumstances.

Hypothesis: A testable statement about the natural world that can be used to build more complex inferences and explanations.

Theory: In science, a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that can incorporate facts, laws, inferences, and tested hypotheses.

(Source: http://arstechnica.com/science/2006/08/5164/)

Edit:

How it works...

"Massive objects are attracted to each other by the force of gravity." == Scientific Fact.

"Objects in motion remain in motion. For every force there is an equal an opposite reaction. Force is mass times acceleration." == Scientific Law (Newton's Laws of Motion).

"The bending of space under the influence of gravity can cause light to curve around massive objects." == Scientific Hypothesis (Verified by Eddington's 1919 solar eclipse observations).

All of the above (and a whole lot more) put together == General Theory of Relativity.

[aortega]

>Theory: In science, a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that can incorporate facts, laws, inferences, and tested hypotheses.

...that can be wrong and often are replaced by better theories as more tests and better explanations came out.

Science is based in doubt. If you are too sure of a scientific theory, you are missing what science really is about and what you need is religion.

[jballanc]

Falsifiability is a feature of every element of science. Something that is not falsifiable isn't science. Period.

But a Theory is not a guess. It is a framework built from individual pieces, some of which may be hypotheses (effectively guesses) that have been tested and found to hold within the larger structure of that framework.

[aortega]

If you are based in individual pieces that may be effectively guesses, how you are not also a guess?

[jballanc]

Try formulating your question again, but this time don't leave out the part where I wrote "that have been tested and found to hold".

[chc]

Because you have been tested. The term "guess" implies lack of good grounding.

[BlackDeath3]

The reason that theories are not referred to as "guesses" is because there is, in theory (pun intended), an enormous chasm of evidence between a theory, and a guess/hypothesis.

Nothing is known with absolute certainty. What is the point is referring to everything as a "guess" simply because it isn't known for certain? Context is important here.

[saraid216]

Fallibility doesn't make it a "guess".

[aortega]

Funny you mention the Newton's Laws of Motion, that's the most famous theory demonstrated to be totally wrong.

It was a very good guess though.

[jballanc]

sigh ...take a moment to re-read what I wrote. Then take a moment to re-read what you wrote.

Newton's LAWS of Motion are not a THEORY. They are a descriptive generalization about how gravitation behaves under stated circumstances. Those circumstances being slow speeds and large masses. In those circumstances, they are not wrong. They are a generalization. The THEORY of General Relativity contains Newton's LAWS of motion as a part of the overall framework.

[Iftheshoefits]

No, they are not even remotely close to being correct.

[aortega]

Why? would you say, quantum mechanics theory is a universal truth, a fact, or just a very good guess? Because general relativity is also a theory, but both theories cannot be true in our universe as they contradict.

It's the same with almost any natural science theory. Theories try to be very good aproximations of the truth, until a better guess comes out.

[judk]

Everyone, please stop pretending you aren't intentionally assigning different meanings to the same words. Put substance in your disagreement, not wordplay.

[Iftheshoefits]

What you mean by "guess" isn't how any scientist would interpret "guess" in this context, and that what you call a "guess" is a rather glib and incomplete representation of all the things that comprise a "theory."

[eksith]

If a scientific theory is just a guess, then the human eye is a just lens.

I'm sure you're aware, there's a bit more to it than that.