top of page

I Have a Theory

  • Oct 23, 2021
  • 2 min read

There’s the problem, right there! You have a notion about what I meant from the headline. You might believe I’m thinking about something that’s not been tried or tested in the real world. “Theoretically” is often taken to mean a guess. Blame pop culture and bad sci-fi for that. Some politicians create confusion by saying “theory” when “idea” is more accurate. The words don't mean the same thing.

Paper airplanes are all about precision, and so is science. In science, a theory sits at the top of a mountain of research, testing, publishing, and peer review. To get the high status of a theory, an idea must best describe all the known evidence and best predict how new evidence will fit into its framework. A theory is the end product of a mountain of scientific work.


What most people mean, when the say they have a theory, is that they have a hypothesis—a guess based on what they know. A hypothesis is at the beginning of an idea’s scientific journey. A theory has an honored position at the end.


The next time you hear someone say, “It’s just a theory”, you can be sure they’re not familiar with how science works. There is a theory of gravity. There is an electro-magnetic theory. There is a theory of evolution. All these theories carry the same scientific weight. To throw one out is to throw them all out.


Science is simply a structure for finding out things. No single person speaks for science. It's a product of serious testing and review. It is what we can know at any given moment. While you may hold a particular belief for life, science demands we accept a fact when new, compelling evidence comes to light. A lot of people are uncomfortable with this aspect of science-- that what we believe to be true might change. Over the ages, scientists have been thrown in prison for disproving common beliefs.


But remember, science demands a theory fit all the evidence past, and predict evidence yet to come. Science is hardly ever throwing out the baby with bath water. It's mostly finding a better soap. When you see a headline that screams “… this discovery changes everything…” it rarely does that. Einstein’s theory didn’t mean Newton’s work was bad. It added a new layer of understanding. Newtonian physics works very well to describe events we can see and interact with. Einstein goes further to describe things not easily visible; things we can barely interact with.


Science doesn’t allow for picking and choosing. It just is. If you disagree with science, that’s your opinion. And you’re wrong—theoretically speaking.




 
 
 

16 Comments


whiteelephant680290
May 29

Thanks for sharing this. Everything is presented clearly without oversimplifying the subject. To be honest, I wasn't expecting to learn much when I opened this page, but I ended up reading the whole thing. Many articles cover the same subject, yet they often miss the real-world perspective that makes information useful. I ended up bookmarking https://proshtuchnyiintelekt.com/ because it provides examples that are actually useful in everyday situations. Both this article and that resource focus on real value rather than unnecessary complexity. I found this genuinely helpful and informative. I'll definitely check back for future updates.

Like

Bradley Sheppard
Bradley Sheppard
May 22

I found this post interesting because it shares a personal theory in a creative and reflective way. It reminded me of brainstorming ideas for school projects, where I had to balance thinking time with deadlines, so I used online course services to manage some coursework and focus more on developing my ideas. The article shows how curiosity can lead to better thinking and new perspectives.

Like

Steven Burgees
Steven Burgees
May 20

I enjoyed how the post explores theories behind paper airplane performance through curiosity and experimentation. When I worked on a small engineering project involving flight patterns and design testing, I used Artificial Intelligence Assignment Help to manage coding tasks while focusing on the practical side of experimentation. The article reminds me that simple hands on projects often teach problem solving better than only reading theory from textbooks.

Like

toootaa1210
May 10

Mình có lần lướt đọc mấy trao đổi trên mạng شيخ روحاني thì thấy nhắc nên cũng tò mò mở ra xem thử cho biết. Mình không tìm hiểu sâu rauhane chỉ xem qua trong thời gian ngắn để quan sát bố cục s3udy cách sắp xếp các mục và trình bày nội dung tổng thể. Cảm giác là các phần được trình bày khá gọn, các mục rõ ràng nên đọc lướt cũng không bị rối Berlinintim, với mình như vậy là đủ để nắm   tin cơ bản rồi. q8yat

Like

ticklishmeercat966667
Apr 27

To be fair, this article was actually worth reading.

Scrolling through, I was about to skip it, but it held my attention.

There’s something about the way it’s written that doesn’t feel forced, which is rare.

Also, I ran into https://infowomenspace.com/ recently and it gave me a similar vibe, so maybe it’s just me.

So yeah, appreciate this — curious to read more.

Like
Featured Posts
Recent Posts
Archive
Search By Tags
Follow Us
  • Facebook Basic Square
  • Twitter Basic Square
  • Google+ Basic Square
bottom of page