Re: [Phys-l] nature of science

["John Clement" <clement@hal-pc.org>]

This has been around before.  A word law is generally used for a
relationship between variables.  As such, it may be generally applicable, or
it may be limited to a certain range.  For example Newton's gravitational
law is fairly general, bur Boyle's law is limited to a range of pressures
and volumes.  Law's generally do not change once they have been measured.

A theory is a framework for putting together all of the relevant
information.  As such it is always modifiable as new information becomes
available.  However, sometimes it is superseded by a newer theory once it
becomes evident that it can not be readily extended.

Hypothesis are vital in all courses to help students develop understanding.
Virtually all of the research based curricula require students to make
predictions (hypothesis?) before seeing the results of a demonstration, or
before doing an experiment.

One thing that should be noted is that often science does not advance in the
elementary school science project fashion.  Many, maybe even most,
experiments never have a hypothesis.  Often an experiment is done to see
what will happen, and no formal hypothesis is generated.  However, the
journal article may have an hypothesis.  The articles neatly present the
results, but often totally out of the actual context in which it was done.

John M. Clement
Houston, TX 

> I have some questions concerning the nature of science.
>
> 1. What is the basic difference between a theory and a law in science?
>
> 2. When Newton first developed it, would we classify Newton's Law of
> Gravitation as a theory or a law?
>
> 3. What is the role of hypothesis in
>
> a) introductory physics courses
>
> b) physics major's courses
>
> c) graduate physics courses
>
> Mangala Joshua
> Physical Science Department
> Mesa Community College