Theories are like chickens, and facts are like eggs.
This essay will discuss the statement “facts are needed to establish theories, but theories are needed to make sense of facts” and will do so by raising the question as to whether scientific conclusions can be justified.
Facts and theories are necessary components in all areas of knowledge. Similarly to the argument as to whether it was the chicken or the egg that came first, it can be difficult to establish whether the facts or the theories are reliant on which. Facts are pieces of information found to be true, and are needed to establish theories. Theories are explanations about questions of our world that are required to make sense of fact. The two are thus known to be interdependent …show more content…
If a theory has been made valid by thorough evidence, then there is no reason as to believe that the conclusion is false. Dalton is an english chemist and mathematician, who was the first person to prove the existence of atoms. His theory is the first complete attempt to describe all matter in terms of atoms and their properties. The theory is called the “Atomic theory” and can be explained in four key concepts—all matter is made up of atoms that are indivisible, all atoms of a given element are identical in mass, properties and compounds are combinations of two or more types of atoms and, atoms are the products of all chemical reactions. During the 1800’s Dalton explored the genetic makeup and nature of air. He conduced a gas experiment in which he measured the amount of water vapour that air could absorb at different temperatures and discovered that rather than being a chemical solvent, it was made up of minute, singular particles that are in constant, random motion. He also researched the properties of compounds and found that compounds are combined full of particles that can be different but are not able to be subdivided. This proved that atoms then exist, and proves the theory that scientific conclusions can be justified so long as there is enough evidence to support …show more content…
Since Dalton’s atomic theory was created in the early 1800’s people were fixed that this was in fact the correct structure of an atom. Recent discoveries however, have been led to disprove the original theory. In part one, although Dalton originally stated that atoms are indivisible, it is now known that atoms can be divisible due to them being made up of protons, neutrons and electrons. Other experiments by Ernest Rutherford, Hans Geiger and Ernest Marsden show that rather than an atom being a “solid, massy” particle they are in fact mostly made up of empty space. Part two of Dalton’s theory has also had to be modified after it was also proven that atoms of the same element may have different masses due to different isotopes of the same element being able to have varied numbers of neutrons. It can therefore be proposed, that while scientific conclusions can never really be justified as they are only able to be true until disproven. No matter the evidence to support the original piece of knowledge, there is no assurance that such a piece cannot later be
Somalie Prak LIBS 4960 Dr. Katie Olivant Chemistry Chemistry is a study of fundamentals of inorganic chemistry. This course is designed to provide you with basic understanding of chemistry and prepare you for more advanced chemistry courses. One concept that I learned in this course was the Atomic Theory. This theory suggests that all matter is made up of tiny indivisible particles that are called atoms. Atoms can be defined as the basic unit of a chemical element or the basic building blocks of matter that make up everyday objects such as a chair, or a table.
Ancient scientist like Democritus and Leucippus proposed the idea of the atom(Doc.1). They were the first to start the long train of ideas and knowledge that brought us to the view of the modern atom(O.I). Since then, scientist such as John Dalton and Dmitri Mendeleyev have made huge leaps in the field of atomic science. John Dalton published the atomic theory of matter(Doc.1). Dmitri Mendeleev created the periodic table that modern scientist use daily(Doc.1).
In conclusion, the characteristics of the scientific method are far from few. Most distinctly, science deals with the uncertainty of the unknown, attempting to make it known. Though complicated, Barry explains his beliefs on the scientific method with strong diction to show the formality of science, rhetorical questions to show the uncertainty, and logos to show the intellect of science. His rhetorical strategies help the audience understand the plethora of characteristics in the realm of
They made it quite clear that this conclusion was not a hard fact. They elaborated by stating how new evidence, theories, and ideas are coming forward all the time, in fact almost every day. It was refreshing to see how the authors could admit how their theories in time could be built upon just as they have built on the theories that came before theirs. The next journal was written by Edward C. Prescott.
In the article "The Origin of Chemical Elements," the prediction that Alpher, Bethe, and Gamow were making, from what I understand, they were trying to suggest that because of the way the neutron gases were compressed at such a high density when the universe was made that they were boiling hot and they needed time to cool. The original idea (that they show side by side with their hypothesis) was that the universe expanded from these gases due to a cooling of temperatures, but they suggest that it also took a great deal of time for the gasses to cool. Thus electrons and protons emerged from the cooling neutron gases as the universe expanded.
The ‘Inference to Best Explanation’ (IBE) is a principle that we should opt for the best explanation if all else is equal between two opposing explanations. (Russell, 2001.) The ‘real-world explanation’ from the sense data acquired from our whole lives is certainly more naturally believable and more simplistic – and so, according to Russell, is the best
One of his most well known is his Bohr model, which shows an atom 's structure, is used in all classrooms that teach chemistry. He also suggested that an electron would drop from a higher orbit to a lower one, which would release a photon(electron configuration). This would later become a foundation upon which quantum theory stood on. Niels Bohr has always been accepted into the
Given access to the same facts, it is possible that there can be disagreement between experts in a discipline. Although I believe this statement holds true for history, I do not believe it is valid in regard to the natural sciences. In history, facts are events that have taken place in time and are accepted to have happened. It is then the responsibility of historians to interpret the significance of these facts. Similarly, in the natural sciences, facts are phenomena that are observed.
Dalton was best known for his work in the development of modern atomic theory. The was Dmitri organized the table was that he wrote out the elements on a card, each card has the atomic weights and were set in columns by order of the atomic weight. Each
To support his theory he used 3 pieces of evidence. He noticed that the continents seemed to fit together. Along with that he saw the distribution of fossils on the continents, and lastly he observed that the rocks and other structures were similar on all different places. The first piece of evidence he found were that the continents seemed to fit together.
In the website “Understanding Evolution and Science”, by Dr.Bonnan talks about how the people have many misconceptions about science and the evolutionary theory. Dr. Bonnan believes that science is not the absolute proof of evolution because scientist can also be wrong and can only depends on the accuracy and probability of their findings. The author also informs about the different ways that scientist see the science and what they can and cannot assume. Another thing that is pointed is that scientist should be open minded and view science with skepticism. It also talks about the different definitions like hypothesis, law and theory, and how law and theory are different from each other.
In mathematics the knowledge we obtain is justified with reason that have straightforward theories and laws. In natural science on the other hand the information we collect is firstly obtained with observations which can be perceived in the wrong manner and then carried out wrong after that, in the natural world things are always changing therefore the results we get now won’t necessarily be correct one hundred years down the line therefore the knowledge we have now of the natural sciences is correct until proven wrong. Knowledge is trustworthy in most of our subjects at school but we can never know if the information we are receiving is 100% accurate or not because in the future we may learn that the information we have is