|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Sat Oct 27, 2007 6:47 am
Leavaros No dear, my point was that many theories are in reality closer to laws that govern our world, gravity being one example. Apply this to evolution and.... -LD A dying man needs to die, as a sleepy man needs to sleep Gravity is not longer just a theory, it is a proven scientific fact, through physics.. Maybe it once was a theory before they tested it over and over! surprised
I made this topic back in August, i hardly posted in it, i am really surprised to see it still up! this is good... and there comes a time when it is wrong, as well as useless, to resist.
~Stewart Alsop
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 27, 2007 8:45 am
*sigh* You're wrong, gravity is still a theory, not a governing law. Read virtually any physics textbook, and it will restate what I have said.
-LD
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 27, 2007 10:34 am
But then why do they call it "The Law of Gravity" if it isn't a law?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Oct 27, 2007 9:58 pm
*tongue in cheek*
Aren't laws meant to be broken? 3nodding
lol
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Oct 28, 2007 2:31 pm
dark_angel_32189 But then why do they call it "The Law of Gravity" if it isn't a law? I've never seen it referred to as a law. Ever. -LD
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Oct 28, 2007 8:40 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Oct 28, 2007 9:13 pm
Really? I've never heard it referred to anything other than a law.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Oct 30, 2007 1:45 am
I second dark angel on that, here in NZ its taught as fact at High School
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Oct 30, 2007 8:45 am
Kareena80 *tongue in cheek* Aren't laws meant to be broken? 3nodding lol I believe the saying goes, Rules are meant to be broken. Laws are not, that's why Rugby (a sport) doesn't have rules governing game play, but laws. 3nodding In any case, I don't want to get Moddy, but isn't this thread about evolution? Not debating the validity of whether or not Gravity is a law? But, on that note I suppose I'll throw in my two cents. I haven't read up on the physics, mostly because they don't entirely interest me, but I believe that gravity, like most things in the universe, is subjective to its materials and environment. Kind of like, the bigger, or more dense, the planet is, the stronger the field of gravity. I don't know the specifics of how clumping together raw materials to create a force strong enough to attract other heavy materials, but the equation of more mass/density equals higher gravity makes sense. On the topic of evolution, I do believe we evolved, but from a seperate cast organism. My theory is usually considered far fetched because I do think that martian life is the instigator of human evolution. Afterall, what ever happened to that missing link? Granted, it could have fallen prey to a predator species or was even wiped out by the next evolved state of human kind. However, it just seems like human beings are some kind of prototype weapon left to evolve on its own. It just seems too coincidental that human history is riddled with each society garnishing newer, bolder and more intelligent methods of killing, as well as the incredible adaptive quality a human body has. That's all just a fantastical thought with no research to back it up. Something I enjoy believing 3nodding . Justin
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Oct 30, 2007 7:01 pm
Perhaps this thread evolved, too? And I'm pretty sure Newton's Second Law was Force. (First is Inertia, Third is Action-Reaction.) Gravity isn't a governing law, but a theory...or so I thought at least. Maybe you're right--I'll ask my physics teacher about it. If humans are good at anything, it's weeding out the competition. That could be the missing link, if you ask me. Sheer, indomitable, brute force. -LD EDIT: Found a website with illustrations! http://teachertech.rice.edu/Participants/louviere/Newton/EDIT EDIT: Finally, thought! Quote: Myth 1: Hypotheses Become Theories Which Become Laws This myth deals with the general belief that with increased evidence there is a developmental sequence through which scientific ideas pass on their way to final acceptance. Many believe that scientific ideas pass through the hypothesis and theory stages and finally mature as laws. A former U.S. president showed his misunderstanding of science by saying that he was not troubled by the idea of evolution because it was "just a theory." The president's misstatement is the essence of this myth; that an idea is not worthy of consideration until "lawness" has been bestowed upon it. The problem created by the false hierarchical nature inherent in this myth is that theories and laws are very different kinds of knowledge. Of course there is a relationship between laws and theories, but one simply does not become the other--no matter how much empirical evidence is amassed. Laws are generalizations, principles or patterns in nature and theories are the explanations of those generalizations (Rhodes & Schaible, 1989; Homer & Rubba, 1979; Campbell, 1953). For instance, Newton described the relationship of mass and distance to gravitational attraction between objects with such precision that we can use the law of gravity to plan spaceflights. During the Apollo 8 mission, astronaut Bill Anders responded to the question of who was flying the spacecraft by saying, "I think that Issac Newton is doing most of the driving fight now." (Chaikin, 1994, p. 127). His response was understood by all to mean that the capsule was simply following the basic laws of physics described by Isaac Newton years centuries earlier. The more thorny, and many would say more interesting, issue with respect to gravity is the explanation for why the law operates as it does. At this point, there is no well. accepted theory of gravity. Some physicists suggest that gravity waves are the correct explanation for the law of gravity, but with clear confirmation and consensus lacking, most feel that the theory of gravity still eludes science. Interestingly, Newton addressed the distinction between law and theory with respect to gravity. Although he had discovered the law of gravity, he refrained from speculating publically about its cause. In Principial, Newton states" . . . I have not been able to discover the cause of those properties of gravity from phenomena, and I frame no hypothesis . . ." " . . . it is enough that gravity does really exist, and act according to the laws which we have explained . . ." (Newton, 1720/1946, p. 547). (Taken from http://amasci.com/miscon/myths10.html )
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Nov 15, 2007 4:13 am
i have a feeling this thread is becoming off topic.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Nov 30, 2007 9:15 pm
I'm a full believer in evolution. It's clear observing animals over decades that they've adapted and evolved to the changing environment. It's just kinda common sense to me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Dec 01, 2007 6:57 pm
don't get any big ideas, they're not going to happen...I'm another one that believes in both Creation and evolution.
BTW, to those who still aren't convinced... Gravity IS a law. ...you'll go to hell for what your dirty mind is thinking.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Dec 28, 2007 2:29 pm
Gravity R not law.
Gravity R theory still. 3nodding i asked around with quite a few peoples and when it is in the texties it is true (not really) lol! XD
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Dec 28, 2007 5:53 pm
I love how the biggest debate around on a Wiccan guild is about gravity, of all things. xD
I'm not a sciencey person, but evolution still makes sense and is but one amazing thing about nature.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
