Probably the best way is to use the scientific method as a means to tell the
differences. The scientific method begins with observation and description
of a phenomenon or group of phenomena. This is data collection. Following
that you is the formulation of an hypothesis to explain the phenomena. In
physics, the hypothesis often takes the form of a causal mechanism or a
mathematical relation. You then use the hypothesis to predict the existence
of other phenomena, or to predict the results of new observations. This is
usually the stage at which there are experimental tests of predictions
generated by the hypothesis. The experimental tests are usually carried out
by several independent experimenters. If the experiments fail to falsify the
hypothesis and tend to support it, the hypothesis may come to be regarded as
a theory or law The difference between a law and a theory is that in a
theory there is always the possibility that it will be disproved or
falsified. A theory is a hypothesis or group of hypotheses that have been
repeatedly confirmed by experiments. A law tends to be those big things of
science, like gravity or such which are generally regarded as fact, and
cannot be disproved or falsified. In some fields, Biology for example, there
aren't any real laws per se. Three that sort of qualify are DNA/RNA as a
means of information transfer, ATP as an energy source, and Evolution
through Natural Selection. Even those are probably not really laws in the
sense of Planck's Constant or some mathematical laws.

One of the problems is that common usage of theory has come to mean a "fuzzy
idea" or "pipe dream." You often hear, for example "Evolution is just a
theory!." The term theory should, properly, be reserved to mean those issues
of science which are very nearly fact or law, but which still have the
potential of being disproved or falsified.

Well, that's how I learnt it in the late Pleistocene.

Steven

But the proper response to this hypothesis
is that there are always people willing to
believe anything, however implausible, merely
in order to be contrary.
                             Vikram Seth
                             A Suitable Boy



-----Original Message-----
From: Discussion forum for environmental ethics.
[mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Lisa Dangutis
Sent: Sunday, February 10, 2002 10:56 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Query of the day?


What is the difference between a scientific theory and a scientific
law?

I know it sounds like a simple question, but I was wondering
your answers.

Sincerely,
Lisa Dangutis