Skip to main content

Hypotheses, Theories, and Life

Spoilers: Theory is not what you may think.  Really, what you think the definition is for the word theory is actually closer to the definition for the word hypothesis.

I've heard people utilize the word "theory" as if they think it means "a random thought which popped into ones head for no reason."  As if these people honestly believe that a theory is on the same level as the statement "Woah, the platypus is proof that God is a toker bro."  I assure you, this is definitely not the case.  This concept of people saying "Just a Theory" has always bugged me, for as far back as I can remember.  (I'm looking at you, MatPat.)

I will now try to get everybody to have a sense for what the word theory really means when applied to science.

Let me begin by defining what a scientific hypothesis means to those who develop science.  The word hypothesis is a statement of rudimentary observation with no systematic testing or method of rigorous observation applied (from the text book "Environment 7th Edition" by Raven, Berg, and Hazzensahl).  It is also a tentative explanation of a phenomenon until experiment can be performed to further refine understanding (from the text book Chemistry: The Central Science 11th Edition by Brown, LeMay Jr., Bursten, Murphey, and Woodward).  Basically, a hypothesis is a statement of "That's curious; let's see if that's true."

Theory, on the other hand, is an entirely different beast.  In any scientific text book (including the three listed above), a theory is defined as a well established, much substantiated description of a system.  There has to be a substantial amount of experiments and observations which has to be done in order for the theory to be legitimate, and those experiments and observations have to be performed by people who are not a part of those group who initially proposed the theory.  The more groups who independently confirm observations which confirm the theory, the stronger ground the theory stands upon.

A theory comes after hypothesis in very much the same way a baked cake follows the ingredients still being in their separate farms about to go to manufacturers.  Very much like the cake analogy, there is a considerable amount of work which needs to be done in order to turn a hypothesis into a full on theory.  As described above, a group needs to run a set of experiments, and a number of groups have to independently confirm those experiments work as advertised.  The more, groups the better.

This is why, when somebody says "just a theory", so many people are up in arms about the phrase.  That phrase implies a level of incompetence which simply isn't there, and a level of pure philosophy which is insulting.  There is too much work put in to developing the theory to be labeled as mere speculation and philosophy.  So the next time you wish to degrade a scientific concept, please don't do it by labeling it "just" a theory.  There's too much effort placed into making it an observable and confirm-able and predictable fact to be lumped in with the toker-philosophers quip.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Basic Statistics Lecture #3: Normal, Binomial, and Poisson Distributions

As I have mentioned last time , the uniform continuous distribution is not the only form of continuous distribution in statistics.  As promised, here are the three most common continuous distribution types.  As a side note, all sampling distributions are relative to the algebraic mean. Normal Distribution: I think most people are familiar with the concept of a normal distribution.  If you've ever seen a bell curve, you've seen the normal distribution.  If you've begun from the first lecture of this lecture series, you've also seen the normal distribution. This type of distribution is where the data points follow a continuous curve, is non-uniform, has a mean (algebraic average) equal to the median (the exact middle value), falls from highest probability at the mean to (for all practical purposes) zero as the x-values approach $\pm \infty$, and therefor has equal number of data points to the left and to the right of the mean, and has the domain of $(\pm \i

Confidence Interval: Basic Statistics Lecture Series Lecture #11

You'll remember last time , I covered hypothesis testing of proportions and the time before that , hypothesis testing of a sample with a mean and standard deviation.  This time, I'll cover the concept of confidence intervals. Confidence intervals are of the form μ 1-α ∈ (a, b) 1-α , where a and b are two numbers such that a<b, α is the significance level as covered in hypothesis testing, and μ is the actual population mean (not the sample mean). This is a the statement of there being a [(1-α)*100]% probability that the true population mean will be somewhere between a and b.  The obvious question is "How do we find a and b?".  Here, I will describe the process. Step 1. Find the Fundamental Statistics The first thing we need to find the fundamental statistics , the mean, standard deviation, and the sample size.  The sample mean is typically referred to as the point estimate by most statistics text books.  This is because the point estimate of the populati

Basic Statistics Lecture #5: Baye's Theorem

As promised last time , I am going to cover Baye's Theorem. If Tree diagram is the common name for Bayes Theorem.  Recall that conditional probability is given by $P(A \mid B) = \frac{P(A \wedge B)}{P(B)}$.   For tree diagrams, let's say that we have events A, B 1 , B 2 , B 3 , … (the reason we have multiple B's is because they all are within the same family of events) such that the events in the family of B are mutually exclusive and the sum of the probabilities of the events in the family of B are equal to 1. Then we have $$P(B_i \mid A)= \frac{P(B_i)*P(A \mid B_i)}{\sum_{m=1}^{n}[P(B_m)*P(A \mid B_m)]}$$  What this means is reliant on the tree diagram. If we are only looking at the sub-items of A, this is what the tree diagram would look like. If J has a probability of 100%, and P(C) and P(D) are not 0, then when we are trying to find the probability of any of the B's being true given that A is true, we have to set the probability of A to be the entir