Measurable facts are science dogma, even though they don't fit the dogma of formal religion. Why? Because they are things that can't be changed. Do a science experiment exactly the same way every time, and you get exactly the same results every time. Science dogma is even stronger than religious dogma.
There are many science theories that are popular, but haven't been proven one way or another, yet remain theories. So, it is the decision of scientists whether or not they will drop a theory from being such.
There are many science theories that are popular, but haven't been proven one way or another, yet remain theories. So, it is the decision of scientists whether or not they will drop a theory from being such.
No you don't necessarily get the same result every time. Schrodinger's cat can testify to this. Also, it is true that many science theories haven't been proven one way or the other. Although most theories have substantial evidence to back them up. (For instance, the predictions given by the Theory of General Relativity keep testing out as true.) That is why they are called "theories."
All scientific theories have susbtantial evidence behind them, thats why they are scientific theories. Badecker thinks that only "facts" matter but in science and in anything a 100% fact simply does not exist.
So you think that it's a 100% fact that 100% facts don't exist?
Regarding Schrodinger's cat, the whole idea is to look at things that might go beyond, even, relativity. It's an area of random in the sense of the unknown, not in the sense of spontaneity. So, it isn't being done the same every time. Rather it is being done differently every time. Consider that as the earth turns, and revolves around the sun, and the sun moves through space, that the location is different. So nothing is the same.
Even Einstein showed that Relativity only worked with things of Relativity. Many people think that he didn't accept the ether. But all that he did was to reject the ether as operating in the same sphere of universal influence as Relativity:
...
Recapitulating, we may say that according to the general theory of relativity space is endowed with physical qualities; in this sense, therefore, there exists an ether. According to the general theory of relativity space without ether is unthinkable; for in such space there not only would be no propagation of light, but also no possibility of existence for standards of space and time (measuring-rods and clocks), nor therefore any space-time intervals in the physical sense. But this ether may not be thought of as endowed with the quality characteristic of ponderable media, as consisting of parts which may be tracked through time. The idea of motion may not be applied to it.
Recapitulating, we may say that according to the general theory of relativity space is endowed with physical qualities; in this sense, therefore, there exists an ether. According to the general theory of relativity space without ether is unthinkable; for in such space there not only would be no propagation of light, but also no possibility of existence for standards of space and time (measuring-rods and clocks), nor therefore any space-time intervals in the physical sense. But this ether may not be thought of as endowed with the quality characteristic of ponderable media, as consisting of parts which may be tracked through time. The idea of motion may not be applied to it.
In other words, science theories exist in their sphere of existence. But the complexity of all nature keeps us from understanding many connections between many theories, which connections render the theories in ways that are not part of the theories.
As I explained several times, scientific theories are like crimes. How do you solve a crime? You can't go back in time and if it's not recorded, how can you make sure who did it? Well, you look at the evidence and when you find the DNA of the killer on the scene and the victim, the weapon in his house with his fingerprints, his motive, witnesses that saw him at the time of the crime around the area of the crime, etc, you can be pretty sure he did it but are you 100% totally sure? Never but it's more than enough to go to jail, same thing with scientific theories.
