You create a theory. Prove the theory to be true by testing it. If it works, it is true. If it does not work, it is not true.
The word proven is an adjective. It descrbes something that has been proved.
A criminal conviction in court would normally require proof.
true
Constructive Force is something thats CONSTRUCTIVE
something with helium or silly string
no
I know for one thing, that science can't prove anything. That is essentially one major thing that makes up science today, and has for centuries. But really, If science can't prove anything, Did science just prove that science can't prove anything? Because if it did, then you can prove that science is wrong, because you just proved something!
Science cannot really PROVE anything. If you consider the arguments of, for example, the 18th century philosopher David Hume, then you will see that science cannot prove things as it consistently relies on induction to form conclusions and induction does not say that something is definitely the result of something else, only that it could be or is likely or even appears at this moment to be the only explanation. Therefore, if we put this belief into the original question "Can science prove something that does not exist?", both yes and no can be argued. No because science cannot prove anything, therefore, it cannot prove something that does exist and it cannot prove something that does not exist. Yes because if you do still believe that science can prove that existing things do exist, you will believe that it can prove that non-exisiting also exist because obviously if a mistake is made to come to this false conclusion, you (the person who has found such a result) will not know the mistake has occured and will not question it if you have done everything right according to the procedures for proving things, because you believe that if you have followed such procedures then you must have proven it because that is the way you believe science works. A complicated discussion really, depends what you believe about the reliabity of 'fact' and the nature of 'proof'. it's true the science is can really prove any thing.=]
Most science uses indutive reasoning
Science makes useful models pf reality and uses solid facts to prove the exostance of seemingly unexplainable things. Throught the scientific method information is obtained and tested to prove facts. Science is a method of reconciling practical ends with scientific laws. The laws formed through study and testing prove them to be true.
It is not possible to prove something that is not true. The square of 2 is rational, not irrational.
It is impossible to prove a hypothesis true because science aims to falsify hypotheses rather than prove them true. A hypothesis can only be supported by evidence, but it can never be proven definitively true because new evidence could potentially challenge or change our interpretation of it.
It is rare and difficult to prove a hypothesis true or false through experimentation. While it is typically easy to prove something completely false, proving it true is another story.
A segment need not be a bisector. No theorem can be used to prove something that may not be true!
Fact
an educated guess or something you want to prove, the main goal of your experiment.
He wants to prove he can make new life? or something like that.