this post was submitted on 30 Aug 2023
235 points (100.0% liked)

196

16238 readers
1884 users here now

Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.

Rule: You must post before you leave.

^other^ ^rules^

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 40 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

cute cat pic and funny juxtaposition, but real talk:

In the scientific context (in which the subject is speaking because they reference both physics and a place of education) one does not have "theories", because theory is the plural of theorem, and a theorem is a collection of related facts which conclusively describe, with predictive accuracy, the causes and effects of a phenomenon.

But if one does indeed wish to present one theorem or more to the scientific community, one may attempt to publish a paper - not to a college, but to a scientific journal. Then, other scientists from around the world will be able to attempt to experimentally reproduce the cause and effect relationships which your theory attempted to describe, and a consensus will form as to whether each theorem is, or is not, bunk.

[–] [email protected] 24 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

That's not the way the term "theory" is used here. You should look up etymological fallacy.

Edit: it's not even true etymologically. The etymological plural of theorem (or rather theorema) is theoremata.

[–] [email protected] 23 points 1 year ago

The singular of "theory" isnt "theorem". Its "theory", and the plural is "theories".

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 year ago

More of a hypothesis isnt it?