So basically you're saying science is a struggle to disprove theory. As you said Science is nothing but Theory. So Science is designed to disprove itself. As you said earlier....
Yes. It is pointless to attempt to prove a theory right. So I'll say it again, they try to disprove theories. If they can find a single situation in which their theory is wrong, it means the theory doesn't hold and need to be discarded or reworked. That is how scientifical breakthroughs are discovered.
The discovery of new technology comes in the form of theory. When it's been manifested it's still science. Scientific facts exist in physical proof, not in Theory alone.
Technology is not really science. Science is only really physical, biological, and to some extent social. Technology is a separate field, albeit sometimes built on science. The reason for this is that inventions most of the time serve a purpose that the inventor thought up. That is, the invention is built to serve a specific purpose. Additionally, a lot of inventions are built through math, and math is not really science, as I mentioned before. Math is only a tool for science, not science itself.
Any inventor that defies the written laws of physics or thermodynamics will be ridiculed and laughed at. Any scietist that agrees with the proof is putting everything on the line. But seriously if the inventor is correct, what's the laughing matter ?
No, if his invention works, he will not be ridiculed at. Besides, the laws of physics can be wrong. A physical law is not something that's 100% correct and can never be wrong. A physical law, as I said before, is a generalization, that is assumed to be true based on repeated scientific experiments. Newton's law of gravity is wrong. The law of equivalent exchange is wrong. However, they
do hold true in the majority of situations we know of, and are thus considered laws.
The type of people that make 3D software are scientists. 3D software like all software and even hardware is called computer science.
But it is not a scientific field, for reasons I already stated. The computer can be a great tool for scientists, though, as it makes calculating things and predicting various outcomes much easier and faster.
Science is built upon many different things. A model, which the scientists make to try to predict the results of an experiment or observation. However, a scientist is under no condition to let personal biasis affect the outcome of an experiment or observation.
He can then make a hypothesis as to why things happen the way they are in the experiments or observations, and then form a theory based on a several hypothesis. A large amount of hypothesis are usually logically bound together by a theory.
Generally, absolute truth does not exist within science, as all theories are open to be falsified. That includes the physical laws.
And no, I didn't say science is designed to disprove itself. I said science is based around trying to falsify theories, as proving them is pointless. If you still missed
why that is pointless, I'll say it again. Proving a theory is right, proves nothing but being right under those very conditions, and does not prove a theory is universally correct. Good examples for this are Newton's law of gravity and the law of equal exchange.