• Cyrus Draegur
    link
    fedilink
    English
    40
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    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]
      link
      fedilink
      24
      edit-2
      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.

    • Poplar?
      link
      fedilink
      231 year ago

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

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      91 year ago

      Doctor he is suffering from major theory disorder, everytime he sees a object he need to know the theory behind it, he is now understanding beds.

      I’m afraid he might become a scientist in the future.

      Doctor please, we are a respectable family save my son from this awful destiny.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    61 year ago

    This is a common issue in physics. If I am not mistaken there is a site dedicated to answering amateur-physicist questions, askthephysicist dot com.