The Museum of Hoaxes
Top 100 Discoveries
Posted By:
Maegan
in Tampa, FL - USA
Dec 06, 2004
 http://tech.tbo.com/tech/MGB7EMFTD2E.html

I found this. At the bottom is the list of the top 100 science discoveries. I realize that any "Tops" list can be more opinion than anything...but some of the things listed are theories. A theory isn't a discovery is it? It's a friggin' guess! "My theory is, I'll have spaghetti for dinner tonite!" <- #101! (Okay, so it's not science related...but you get the picture right??)
Category: Science; Replies: 11

Comments
The Curator
in San Diego
 Member
Posted: Mon Dec 06, 2004 | 11:28 AM
But is your spaghetti-dinner-revelation really a theory, in the scientific sense? It's testable, yes. But does it explain anything? Can it be used to predict other patterns of behavior, besides that one dinner? We probably need to resurrect the ghost of Karl Popper and get his opinion on this.
Maegan
Posted: Mon Dec 06, 2004 | 01:18 PM
I'm just saying there are lots of theories. There are lots of incredible discoveries. Discovering oxygen I can understand, but a THEORY of something?? How is that a discovery? It's not really a discovery b/c it has only theoretically been discovered...or it COULD be discovered b/c of this theory. It's not discovered in the present tense. It's discovered in the future tense. I don't think this makes sense. I never did understand this part of science...

This is from Merriam-Webster's:
41 entries found for theory. The first 10 are listed below.
To select an entry, click on it. For more results, click here.
theoryatomic theoryauteur theorybig bang theoryBohr theorycatastrophe theorycell theorycohomologydecision theorydevil theory

Main Entry: the
Paul
Posted: Mon Dec 06, 2004 | 03:15 PM
You still have to discover a theory before it can be proven.
BugbearSloth
Posted: Mon Dec 06, 2004 | 03:26 PM
Here are the "theories" I have found on the site:

* Atomic theory - atoms as the building blocks of matter had not been seriously discussed until John Dalton reproposed the theory. He turned out to be right (http://dl.clackamas.cc.or.us/ch104-04/dalton's.htm)

* Asteroid theory of dinosaur extinction - not a theory. John Titor and I went back in time and witnessed this event. Pretty cool, huh? Actually, this really is a theory and probably shouldn't be in a list of "discoveries".

* Theory of natural selection - this is proven true daily in these times. The dodo bird was not able to adapt to humans coming onto its island and shooting it. Other species, like geese, seem to be able to handle this better. Geese live today thanks to natural selection.

* Germ theory - One of Louis Pasteur's contributions to humanity. Proposed by Pastuer in 1860, with another dude named Koch coming up with and experiment to prove that he was right in 1876.(http://www.towson.edu/~wubah/medmicro/Germ_theory.htm)

I think the article means (with the exception of the dinosaur extinction theory) that theories that were later proven to be true are great discoveries because proposing said theories directly lead to the proof of them. People still refer to "Einstein's Theory", even though they should be calling it "Einsteins' Law". It has been proven to be true many times now.
Charybdis
Posted: Mon Dec 06, 2004 | 03:36 PM
A theory can have very real applications, though. E=MC2 is just a theory but it was the kick-off to the nuclear age. Mushroom clouds are very real.

The idea of oxygen started out as a theory as well. There is no way to absolutely PROVE that oxygen exists. All we (and by we I mean others, since I'm no scientist) can do is give as much evidence as possible that oxygen exists. Right now, through empiracle experiments and observations, the preponderance of the evidence indicates an extremely strong likelyhood that oxygen exists. So strong, in fact, that it's taken for granted by the scientific establishment. But that in no way means that it's true. It's possible (but highly unlikely) that what we know as oxygen will come to be understood as something completely different, but less obvious, in the future.

A theory is not just a vague, random idea - it's backed up with observation and experiments. The common idea of a "theory" may be more abstract than other, physical discoveries, but it's only a matter of degree. Everything is a theory when you get down to it.
Maegan
Posted: Tue Dec 07, 2004 | 09:39 AM
You've explained things in a way that makes sense for me to at least figure the Top 100 is at least mostly okay.

Thanks!
Maegan
Posted: Tue Dec 07, 2004 | 11:23 AM
Update:

I did not, in fact, have spaghetti for dinner. I had a little mug of homemade chicken noodle soup, some celery w/ ranch dressing (my daughter actually ate my celery...I ended up w/ a dollop of ranch dressing...which I did not end up eating), some crackers w/ cheese spread, & a turkey sandwich w/ provolone cheese, mayo, & lettuce on pumpernickel. For dessert: Tin Roof icecream, which I also had to share with my daughter who does not like the 'beans' (peanuts).
james okoye
Posted: Thu Jun 16, 2005 | 11:35 AM
You've explained things in a way that makes sense for me to at least figure the Top 100 is at least mostly okay.

Thanks!
james magu okoye
Citizen Premier
in spite of public outcry
 Member
Posted: Thu Jun 16, 2005 | 08:57 PM
This may be a bit late to mention, but theories are ideas that come from facts. Atomic Theory is still a theory, but it has to be a theory because we can never actually see an atom. We just develop a theory to fit all the evidence that suggests that they exist.
David B.
Member
Posted: Fri Jun 17, 2005 | 04:41 AM
Gaah!

Laws are not theories that have been 'proved'!

Laws are not theories that have been 'proved'!

Laws are not theories that have been 'proved'!

Got that?

Newton's laws are mathematical generalizations about the behaviour of moving bodies, they provide no reason or mechanism as to why they might be so.

Maxwell's laws describe the nature of static and moving electric and magnetic charges, and the relationship between the two. They do not explain this relationship.

"E = mc2" is NOT a theory. It is Einstein's energy equation (and is sometimes referred to as a law). Einstein's theory of Special relativity, of which this equation is one consequence, is a lot more than that.

Darwin's theory of evolution by natural selection IS a theory. It attempts to provide a logical, cogent argument as to why [A] is the way it is, and in the process implies and [C] and would someone kindly go and look for them?

Laws describe, theories explain, hypotheses propose.

http://www.madsci.org/posts/archives/oct99/940942724.Sh.r.html

:coolmad:
Citizen Premier
in spite of public outcry
 Member
Posted: Fri Jun 17, 2005 | 01:18 PM
Just out of curiosity, shouldn't it be Einstein's Theory of Special Relativity, and Darwin's Theory of Evolution by Natural Selection? I'm not really sure if theories get the title case.

Note: This thread is located in the Old Forum of the Museum of Hoaxes.