To: Soliton; DaveLoneRanger
Yes — Newton’s Law of Universal Gravitation would be called Newton’s Theory of Universal Gravitation” if it were being named today. Science is much more provisional today — which recognizes the provisional nature of our understanding of anything.
Newton’s “Law” is descriptive — it describes the nature of the “force” of gravity; but, it doesn’t actually explain gravity. It also only works within a framework of “Newtonian” physics. Ever since Einstein’s Theory of General Relativity; we’ve known that Newton’s “Law” is wrong — or at least that it’s only true for “most practical purposes”.
So, if you drop your computer it falls — but, it falls in curved space-time.
Evolution fails to be a proven theory in that well-stated view of a theory. There is NO proof of evolution that approaches anywhere close to the near-perfect fit of orbital positions observed over centuries and Sir Isaac’s formulae.
posted on 02/19/2008 7:18:44 PM PST
To: USFRIENDINVICTORIA; DaveLoneRanger; metmom; Alter Kaker
"Yes Newtons Law of Universal Gravitation would be called Newtons Theory of Universal Gravitation if it were being named today. Science is much more provisional today which recognizes the provisional nature of our understanding of anything."
How about our 'provisional' understanding of Euclidian Geometry?
Yes, we are masters of all we survey, except when we're not
posted on 02/19/2008 7:26:09 PM PST
(Turning the general election into a second Democrat primary is not a winning strategy.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson