On 4/19/2011 3:24 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Apr 2011 14:38:22 -0700, Patrick Elliott wrote:
>
>> Actually, this represents two huge problems with their hypothesis
>> (please stop using theory, since that implies they already have some
>> sort of evidence to imply it is/could be true).
>
> Just a fair point, "theory" can also mean "hypothesis", just as it can
> mean "body of knowledge about a scientific subject".
>
> Jim
No it can't. Not in science. In science the two terms have clear and 
distinct differences. The only place they mean the same thing is in 
non-scientific language, where they get used damn near interchangeably. 
This leads to serious confusion in the non-scientific world, since its 
about the equivalent of trying to go from the normal world into 
politics, where lie = reasonable opinion, and truth = negotiable 
interpretation.

If you want to understand something, you need to use clear definitions. 
Outside of the scientific community, the distinction between hypothesis 
and theory is muddier than hell, with guess and theory being used to 
mean the same thing, and hypothesis having no use at all. In reality, on 
a scale of 1-10, where 1 = guess, and 10 = theory, hypothesis is, maybe 
a 3 or 4. There may be sufficient cause, from experience, to presume 
that an hypothesis is worthy of examination, but it isn't yet a theory, 
since you haven't "done" anything to actually test it.

The last thing needed is to muddy the waters more, by claiming that an 
untested hypothesis = an established theory.

Post a reply to this message