Isaac Newton discovered gravity. Newton actually discovered gravity by studying comets, not apples falling from a tree.
One could argue that one or more Greeks in the golden age should hold the title, but many of their works did not survive. Isaac Newton seem to be the heir apparent. More than anything else, his books, "Principia" and "Optiks" solidified his position. Any student is invited to read "Principia" and will find an amazing and brilliant mind wrote it--and you will understand why Newton is held in such high regard.
Gold is an excellent conductor of heat and electricity. Couple that with its ability to resist corrosion and it's easy to see why it is in common use in modern electronics, just to name one applicatiion.
the mythical theory is Darwins theory of evolution was just that, a mythical theory, and alot of scientists today will still tell you it is that even though we teach it to our kids at school as truth, saying we came from apes or maybe a big bang is just myth and legend, a theory, me and you could create our own if we wanted to, and we would have just as much right as Darwin did. ============================= Indeed ! That first answer has a lot going for it. It shows that somebody is beginning to have a glimmer of how that part of science works. Yes indeed. You, me, him, and everybody else have a perfect right to create our own theory if we want to. As much as Darwin, Einstein, and Newton ever had. There's no question about that part. The part that comes next is the important part . . . what happens to your theory after you tell everyone about it. Everyone who hears your new theory goes to work on it, thinks about it, and works it into his daily life in as many ways as he can think of. Then comes the payoff: If your new theory explains things that we see around us every day, and if it predicts other things that we've never seen but turn out to be true when we set up and test them, then you've got a winner. If there was any other theory before, that doesn't do the explaining or predicting as well as yours does, then everybody throws the old one out, adopts yours as the standard theory, and you get invited to all the scientists' cocktail parties. But on the other hand, if your theory doesn't explain things we see around us every day, and if it predicts things that we don't find when we look for them, then yours is the one that joins all the others currently in the dustbin of history. That's how science works. Now get busy ... write your theory to replace Darwin's. And P.S.: Maybe before you start work, you ought to read Darwin's, so that you actually understand what it is that you're so hot about. For example, there's no place in anything Darwin ever wrote where he says we came from apes.
The short answer: No one has proved it wrong, otherwise it wouldn't still be the model used in science. You can read all kinds of different arguments against it, but you will find most of those arguments are founded upon a gross misunderstanding of evolution and/or a deep distrust of basic science.There are various ways in which evolutionary theory could be proven wrong:Find a statistically significant violation of the pattern of nested hierarchies observed in all life, that cannot be explained by various modes of lateral gene transfer. For example, find a primate older than its basal mammalian form, or a mammal predating a basal tetrapod form, or a bird with nipples, or mammals with feathers. This would conclusively disprove common descent.Observe spontaneous generation of new, modern lifeforms. While this would not directly disprove common descent, it would suggest that there are other mechanisms at work by which new species emerge.Observe speciation generating lifeforms outside the clade from which they emerge. For instance, if it were ever observed that cats were born from dogs, or birds from cats, then that would cast serious doubt on the validity of common descent.There are numerous more specific and detailed predictions that follow logically from evolutionary theory, and that could, if observations were found to be inconsistent with them, lead to the falsification of evolutionary theory. Darwin was not trained in any field of science, but was instead trained to be a pastor. While he was on a ship he read a book that mentioned geological gradualism which states that geological formations took millions of years to form. This book referred greatly to the Sanacrouse River valley, which was a small river in a huge valley, it made sense to Darwin that it would have taken a long time for that tiny river to carve that huge valley. He then went to the Galapagos Islands. While he was there he discovered that on different islands the same type of animals were slightly different.? He was also presented ancient fossilized bones of other creatures that varied quite substantially from modern forms, such as sloths that lived along the western coast of South America.Short history of Charles Robert Darwin. As a young child he was quite the thinker, loved nature and collecting samples. He went to a doctor's school to study medicine. He wasn't interested and learned taxidermy rather then medicine. His second year he met up with Lamarck when he joined a group but again was bored and learned the basic taxonomy of plants. His father disapproved of his negligence of his studies and send him to a Christian college. He was deemed unfit and didn't get to study for a bachelor's degree but an ordinary one. Darwin liked being outside more than studying and his brother introduced him to the hobby of collecting beetles. His love for this hobby made him a friend of a botany professor and got to meet many more scientists. Nearing his exams he dedicated much time to study and loved the language and logic of 'Evidences of Christianity'. Inspired by many other works, most looking for God doing his work through the laws of nature, he wanted to contribute and learned geology. He even left on a trip with his geology professor to find a letter of recommendation which invited him aboard the HMS Beagle. He was already 22 years old when he started his voyage, aside from this being known to the general public, I think I made my point.
Thomas Edison invented these things as well as many others in his workshop.
The present perfect of the verb to invite is "has invited" and "have invited".Examples:I have invited my sisters.You have invited my sisters.He (she) has invited my sisters.We have invited my sisters.They have invited my sisters.
we use invited when you have aldready been invited
You and your family are invited.
when was the internet invited
The correct form of invitation in "you are invited to lunch" or "you are invited at lunch" is "you are invited to lunch". You could also say, "you are invited to lunch at my house" as this would be grammatically correct.
No, it is not an adverb. Invitation is a noun.
The person responsible for inventing the cell phone is Doctor Martin Cooper. He invented the technology for the cell phone when he was the Director of Research and Development at Motorola
Forms of the verb to invite are inviting (gerund) and invitation (noun).A different word is the adjective invitiate, meaning not spoiled or corrupted.