Difference between revisions of "Talk:Scientific law"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
TempestHead (talk | contribs) |
ArnoldFriend (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| + | Rewrote the entire thing. The definition is accurate now, put in examples from physics and an explanation of the difference between a law and a theory. I think examples of laws and theories from Chemistry, Biology, etc. would be great. Also, I think an introductory paragraph might be needed, I don't know. [[User:ArnoldFriend|ArnoldFriend]] 18:00, 25 September 2008 (EDT) | ||
| + | |||
I question the validity of this article, since there really is no such thing as scientific law. [[User:ColinR|ColinR]] 17:15, 15 March 2007 (EDT) | I question the validity of this article, since there really is no such thing as scientific law. [[User:ColinR|ColinR]] 17:15, 15 March 2007 (EDT) | ||
:There are plenty of things that are considered scientific law by a very large majority. For example, the laws of thermodynamics, or the laws of pressure, etc. --[[User:TempestHead]] | :There are plenty of things that are considered scientific law by a very large majority. For example, the laws of thermodynamics, or the laws of pressure, etc. --[[User:TempestHead]] | ||
Revision as of 22:00, September 26, 2008
Rewrote the entire thing. The definition is accurate now, put in examples from physics and an explanation of the difference between a law and a theory. I think examples of laws and theories from Chemistry, Biology, etc. would be great. Also, I think an introductory paragraph might be needed, I don't know. ArnoldFriend 18:00, 25 September 2008 (EDT)
I question the validity of this article, since there really is no such thing as scientific law. ColinR 17:15, 15 March 2007 (EDT)
- There are plenty of things that are considered scientific law by a very large majority. For example, the laws of thermodynamics, or the laws of pressure, etc. --User:TempestHead