Reply to comment

I, too, was not quite comfortable being told that there is no "truth" -- at least not in science . . . and that nothing is absolutely right. Math and science are closely related. There are things in math that are absolutely right or wrong. There are "proofs." This is why I think we need to distinguish between a theory and a law . . . and that wasn't mentioned today. The normal definition of a law is that it is something that can be proven, normally mathematically; while a theory is an explanation of observed events. By definition it cannot be proven. We can only accumulate more and more data to support it. When data is published that disproves or modifies the theory, it is vetted by other scientists through further experimentation. If others corroborate the initial findings, then the theory is modified or "junked," as appropriate. That is why we have a "law of gravity" and a "theory of evolution." Gravity is proven daily. We cannot prove evolution until we invent a time machine and go back and watch it happen. . . . but, of course, Einstein's theory says that we can't do that, doesn't it?