Ask Lemmy
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Please don't post about US Politics.
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com.
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
view the rest of the comments
I hate hate hate when people try to discredit a theory because "it's a theory not a fact" as if the label of "fact" exists on some kind of science ladder for an idea. "Facts" is a colloquial word like any other, it's not some special category above theories.
Moreover, the most tried and tested theories are facts. Science rarely just disproves an established theory outright. Einstein's General Relatively equations reduces into Newton's Laws of Motion in most situations. Newton's Laws of Motion weren't "wrong", it's just General Relatively is more specific and accurate.
The Scientific Method usually just builds on what already exists without claiming we were all unfactual for working with what we had.
Hypothesis < Theory < Law/Axiom
Axioms are not like the others, they're assumed to be true even before considering any evidence or even arguments.
Theory != hypothesis.
Facts are tiny, but there are a lot of them. Theories are big but only useful the fewer of them there are. Grow oversimplifications, of course, but the more facts a theory can explain, the more successful the theory. Maybe that's is how they should be framed, theories are never proven, they are only successful or disproven.