Scientific models change to reflect ongoing research to explain discrepancies in current theory versus actual experimental results.
No one, with the possible exception of your mother-in-law, knows everything, so we continue trying to explain why the current models work most of the time but not all of the time.
For instance, Isaac newton developed a few laws of things in motion that worked perfectly and without fail for apples falling on your head, Bowling balls and freight trains in motion, but when a few people tried to "smash the atom", that is, to shoot a subatomic particle into the nucleus of an atom, it didn't work. Using Mr. Newton's laws and calculations, they missed every time.
So along came Albert Einstein and mentor max Planck and a few others and, voila! we have a new set of rules, a new model, which works perfectly for little tiny particles...and voila again, we hit the thing dead center.
I doubt that the rules of motion for little particles work for bowling balls, so we still need a tweeked theory that works for both - a new model once again.
Ray
Yes. Scientific models are constantly being reworked based upon new pieces of evidence and research.
That is the purpose of the scientific model.
Scientific models often are based on a set of observations which gie enough information to allow a model to be constructed.
yes
problem, hypothesis, materials, procedures, observations/results, conclusion. explain
A scientific theory becomes better accepted as it helps explain more and more observations.
No, scientific theories change all the time as new observations present new data, new theories are formed to explain the observations and are checked to see if they predict correctly the outcome of new experiments.The scientific method remains the same.
Observations form the basis of hypothesis, Mathematical modelling builds a therory based on the hypothesis. Proof of the validity of the model forms the law.
Scientific Law
yes
The model explains observations well
problem, hypothesis, materials, procedures, observations/results, conclusion. explain
There has been more and more observations about the atom that has changed it since then. They revised it to explain the observations.
Laws are consistent observations and always happen Theories are attempts to explain why certain laws are true.
Theories never become laws. Theories explain facts and scientific observations; laws describe the behavior of an object in nature. A scientific law explains what will happen, but it doesn't explain why. Theories explain why.
A scientific theory becomes better accepted as it helps explain more and more observations.
Data tabledata table...i think
No, scientific theories change all the time as new observations present new data, new theories are formed to explain the observations and are checked to see if they predict correctly the outcome of new experiments.The scientific method remains the same.
Observations form the basis of hypothesis, Mathematical modelling builds a therory based on the hypothesis. Proof of the validity of the model forms the law.
oh my goodness, you are in my class aren't you?