Is plate techtonics a scientific law or theory?

Question

sci. law- More concret, describes a single action, has been studied and proved true.

Sci. Theory- has a lot of evidence, almost like a hypothesis

Answer 1

It is still often called the theory of Plate Tectonics, but is almost universally accepted by Geologists as scientific fact.

Answer 2

Plate tectonics is the most recent scientific theory to explain Earth's landmasses.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plate_tecto...

http://www.platetectonics.com/

http://www.ucmp.berkeley.edu/geology/tec...

http://www.seismo.unr.edu/ftp/pub/louie/...

Answer 3

It's a theory.

It's very difficult to prove something like that.  

Plate techtonics is more of a theory in geology that has been developed to explain the observed evidence for large scale motions of the Earth's lithosphere.  

It's not concrete at all.  F=ma is concrete (Newton's 2nd law) because everything obeys it and nobody will ever find anything that doesn't obey it (nobody has so far except the if you go really really small).  F=ma has also been proven by deductive mathematics, and there isn't a scientist in the world that objects to it.

Plate tectonics is non concrete at all.  if you can find another hypothesis that explains the changes in geology, you have an alternative "theory".  (there are probably ones out there, I'll leave that for you to research)

Answer 4

It's been happening, so it must be true. Law!

Answer 5

OK Folks

If you understand physics (which is the science that underlies all sciences) you would understand that there really is no such thing as a "law".  All things are uncertain and "observed results" are affected by the process of observation.  It is impossible to prove that something is true.

Newton's "law":  F=ma is an equation that "works", but does not really explain why. And guess what? F=ma does not work for large masses and large distances (think astronomy, Einstein's general theory of relativity, ....), or very small dimensions and masses (think quantum mechanics, atomic and nuclear physics), where all classical physics breaks down.

Newton's "law" of universal gravitation says that the physical "laws" that apply on earth apply throughout the universe and for all time.  There are numerous theories that predict that this does not necessarily hold.

So on to "theory".  Some would claim that the "theory of evolution", because it is a "theory", has no basis in fact and is only a belief system.

So then what of Einstein's theories of special relativity and general relativity?  While some current theories predict violations of some of the predictions, every test of both theories has been in agreement with the theories.  Some have been tested to 1 part in 10,000,000,000,000 and the observations agree with the "theory".  In every day life, GPS would not work if relativistic corrections were not made to the data.  No one would claim that the "theories" of relativity are only a hypothesis with no basis to support them.  So should they be called a "law"?  No - science does not work that way.

Plate tectonics is a theory - like many others.  It explains observations and make predictions that have so far been validated without contradiction. Theories do get refined based on new observations.  And some theories get overturned, or at least found to only apply within a narrow range (Newtons "laws").  And by the way

-  plate tectonics is not limited to just the earth.  Planetary astronomers have found evidence of plate tectonics on some of the moons of the outer planets.

-  Geologists are able to measure the rate of movement of different plates using ground based and space based instruments.

Answer 6

Plate tectonics is a theory.

For something to be a scientific law it must be

- universally applicable (Plate tectonics is restricted to the Earth.)

- observable (Plate tectonics is theorized from observed earthquakes and other physical phenomena, but the actual movement of the plates are not observed since they take millions of years)

- can be replicated (Plate tectonics can be modeled but not replicated)

For what it is worth, the Theory of Plate Tectonics is based on scientific laws, most prominently, Archimedes' Principle of buoyancy. (Lighter tectonic plates floating on the surface of the Earth)

Answer 7

A law is an observed relationship.

Observation is Things fall (fact)

Observation

Things fall at this speed and accelerate at this rate. (fact.)

The equation that approximates their rate of falling is a law.

It relates two facts (Law of gravity)

A description of the observed facts is a law

{Newton never supplied a theory of gravity, only a law.}

This happened because ...(maybe this is why = a hypothesis)

If this hypothesis is right this other thing should happen that seems stupid.

If my hypothesis is wrong it should not happen.

(prediction and testing)

Testing supports hypothesis, continue testing but accept hypothesis as best explanation so far.

Call it a theory

If facts contradict the theory later on figure out a new hypothesis that explains new facts.

Test it by its pedictions.

All  good = new theory.

A theory is an explanation of why the facts are what they are.

A theory can be tested by experiment.

A theory with no experiment is just a faith.

We still do not have a true theory of gravity.

---------------

Plate tectonics explains all of the facts, make testable predictions and makes falsifiable predictions contrary to all other explanations.

It qualifies as a theory.

The clincher that established it as a theory was the ability in the 1960s to measure accurately enough to observe the plates moving, just like it predicted.

-------------Keep in mind that the value of a theory is the ability to make useful predictions.