How it was Proven Wrong:
The theory of a static universe was problematic from the start. First of all, a finite universe could theoretically become so dense that it would collapse into a giant black hole, a problem Einstein compensated for with his principle of the "cosmological constant." Still, the final nail in the coffin for the idea was Edwin Hubble's discovery of the relationship between red shift-the way the color of heavenly bodies change as they move away from us-and distance, which showed that the universe was indeed expanding. Einstein would subsequently abandon his model, and would later refer to it as the "biggest blunder" of his career. Still, like all cosmological ideas, the expanding universe is just a theory, and a small group of scientists today still subscribe to the old static model.
The Expanding EarthOur modern understanding of the interior and behaviors of the Earth is strongly based around plate tectonics and the concept of subduction. But before this idea was widely accepted in the late 20th century, a good number of scientists subscribed to the much more fantastical theory that the Earth was forever increasing in volume. The expanding Earth hypothesis stated that phenomena like underwater mountain ranges and continental drift could be explained by the fact that the planet was gradually growing larger. As the globe's size grew, proponents argued, the distances between continents would increase, as would the Earth's crust, which would have explained the creation of new mountains. The theory has a long and storied past, beginning with Darwin, who briefly tinkered with it before casting it aside, and Nikola Tesla, who compared the process to that of the expansion of a dying star.How it was Proven Wrong:
The expanding Earth hypothesis has never been proven wrong exactly, but it has been widely replaced with the much more sophisticated theory of plate tectonics. While the expanding Earth theory holds that all land masses were once connected, and that oceans and mountains were only created as a result of the planet's growing volume, plate tectonics explains the same phenomena by way of plates in the lithosphere that move and converge beneath the Earth's surface.
How_Scientific_theories_can_be_changed_or_replaced_when
Scientific theories can be changed or replaced when there has been significant evidence for the change. The scientific method must be used to create a new hypothesis, which must then be proven.
There is replicatable data that runs counter to the laws/theories.
A scientific theory is not the same as a scientific law because a law is already proved and used but theories can be changed by other scientists is the view of a 13 year old girl.
When there are more convincing theories occur and proved experimentally, scientist will modify or change the current theories.
A scientific theory is not the same as a scientific law because a law is already proved and used but theories can be changed by other scientists is the view of a 13 year old girl.
yes because theories are always changed when found new evidence
Theories can be changed or rejected if and when the scientific evidence no longer supports the theory.
whenever an experiment fails to confirm the theory it is no longer a theory ... it becomes a hypothesis
The Law of Universal Gravitation
How do scientific theories develop and change?
scientific theories are needed because they just are heheehee:D