Post

Herzil wrote:

It also has a Methodological implication, which hasn't sank yet.
Theories in their essence are meant to be broken thats the foundation of every Theory.
The fact that Einstein "theory" is now scientifically approved means that it moves from theory to a "fact" and its a WoW for itself - Methodological speaking.

Actually, a central tenant of science is that there is no such thing as "fact." Hypothesis, which may explain phenomena, are tested; if they stand up to the test AND can be used to accurately predict future phenomena, then they become theories. Theories can become stronger or weaker, depending on their potency, but there is no next step. It goes: unexplained - hypothesis - theory. That's it.

The modern theory of gravity is now mathematically as sound as, for instance, the modern theory of evolution, with respect to predictive potency. However while The Theory of Evolution is cheekily referred to in scientific circles as "The Fact of Evolution," The Theory of Gravity (lacking data on aforementioned M Theory, Dark Matter, etc.) is no better at explaining the origin of gravity, and would still not be a fact even if it were.

I didn't want people getting the wrong idea. Science inherently hold itself responsible by never claiming to know anything for certain, ever.