Want this question answered?
You're playing with words ... a "law" is just a thumb nail description of a theory.
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.
The relationship is, in order to become a scientific law, you have to have many observations by many different people. If you want to prove it is not a theory, you have to observe it.
One user said:The scientific method becomes valuable when you internalize it as a process to solve problems in life.Examples of health problems: toothache, fever, flu,sore eyes, stomachache, indigestion, and many more. It has worked for hundreds of years.
It is called a theory out of convention. Some biologists refer to it as Darwin's Law of Evolution, because it is pretty well established. In science, a theory is any well substantiated explanation for some aspect of the world. That is why we have Newton's theory of gravity, and Einstein's even better theory of gravity (General Relativity). Evolution is both a well established fact (it has been observed, and it explains the sequence and arrangement of the fossil record), as well as a scientific theory (descent with modification, or random mutations coupled with natural selection, or that most modern (and extinct) species share common ancestry. Evolution is a fact, not a theory. How it proceeds are the various theories. When people use the term 'theory of evolution' they are generally, referring to Darwins theory of how evolution progresses. Which is through natural selection. That is a theory not evolution.
A scientific theory becomes better accepted as it helps explain more and more observations.
A scientific theory become a law when it is widely recognized and accepted by the scientific community in the epoch.
When you formulate a research design that has already been accepted.
a theorem rather, it has to be proven to become an accepted theory.
a theorem rather, it has to be proven to become an accepted theory.
when there s proof to back it up with evidence or an experiment to test the hypothesis
Darwinism became popular right at the onset, in the late 1800s. It has gained increasing acceptance, with occasional bursts of public and scientific interest, ever since then. Today it is universally accepted by the scientific community, and widely accepted by the larger public.
Religion basically states "the world is as it is because God made it that way". If you prefer an answer that has a bit more of reasoning to it, then you'll probably like the scientific explanation - which tries hard to do away with the "because" answer - better.
The BCS theory was widely accepted as the proper scientific explanation for superconductivity because it successfully explained several key experimental observations. These observations included the abrupt drop in electrical resistance below a critical temperature, the existence of energy gaps in the electronic spectrum, and the isotope effect. Additionally, the theory provided a coherent framework for understanding the interaction between electrons and lattice vibrations, known as phonons, which was crucial in understanding superconductivity.
True. the theory is the proposed set of statements. When you have a law, it means it is the final and correct answer.
Although the spelling may be wrong in places, the sentence is true.
Do you mean legal to be taught in schools? Evolution has been the accepted theory as to the origin of 'complex' life for around 150 years. I'm not sure when it became legal to be taught in schools. Probably around the same time the scientific community accepted it.