November 13, 2004 @ 1:44 am by sean
This is from ‘National Geographic’ and pertains to a cafeteria discussion from a while ago.
“Each of these theories is an explanation that has been confirmed to such a degree, by obersevation and experiment, that knowledgeable experts accept it as fact.”
The theories they talk about earlier in the sentence are relativity, Copernicus’ solar-centricity of our solar system, continental drift, the existance structure and dynamics of atoms, electricty and evolution(which the article is about). Though they didn’t mention gravity, my point still stands that it can still be a ‘theory’ even if you let go of your fork and it drops to the table. And when I go home and remember I’ll find the article in another scientific magazine that mentions gravity as a theory.
This is from Encarta:
The gravitational attraction of objects for one another is the easiest fundamental force to observe and was the first fundamental force to be described with a complete mathematical theory<– by the English physicist and mathematician Sir Isaac Newton. A more accurate theory<– called general relativity was formulated early in the 20th century by the German-born American physicist Albert Einstein. Scientists recognize that even this theory<– is not correct for describing how gravitation works in certain circumstances, and they continue to search for an improved theory.<——————I added the arrows.
This is from Britannica:
The Newtonian theory of gravity is based on an assumed force acting between all pairs of bodies—i.e., an action at a distance.