The Rationale as to Why Scientific Fact is Often Referred to as “Scientific Theory”

The term “theory” placed behind suffixes of large theories like gravity, evolution, and special relativity (e.g. the Theory of Gravity, the Theory of Evolution, the Theory of Special Relativity etc.), doesn’t mean “theory” in the traditional sense. During the 20th century, Sir Isaac Newton’s Laws of Motion began to break down within the theories own borderlines as physics progressed further and further to answer continually larger and more complex questions. As a direct result of this, a grander, more encapsulating law was required to explain certain phenomena (e.g. the reason the sun has a corona of light bend around it during a total solar eclipse) which is why Albert Einstein’s Theory of Relativity is so immensely important, as it explains such phenomena after which Newton’s laws begin to break down (e.g. Newton’s ability to predict planetary orbit but not explain why such a function occurs in nature etc.). Eventually the international scientific community unanimously agreed that laws should not be named as such because they may not remain laws in the long term, as there may be concepts outside of them which help explain both the supposed law itself as well broader phenomena outside of the suppositional law. The term “theory” was utilized to replace the term “law” because something scientific which can change over time, is not or was not truly a law to begin with. The term “theory” is used in the connotation of an idea which accurately describes a phenomena and empowers an observer to accurately predict what they have yet to observe. An idea isn’t genuinely a “theory” until it’s supported by empirical evidence, before which time it remains as a “hypothesis”

Leave a Reply