Final answer:
Scientific theories and laws serve different purposes in science and do not transform into one another. Theories explain why phenomena occur while laws describe what happens, often in a mathematical form. Both play important roles in our understanding of the natural world and neither is 'higher' or more proven than the other.
Step-by-step explanation:
I disagree with the statement that theories require more evidence to become laws. Theories and laws serve different purposes in science. A scientific theory is an explanation of a phenomenon or a group of phenomena that has been repeatedly tested and confirmed through observation and experimentation. Theories aim to explain why things happen. On the other hand, a scientific law describes a generalized pattern in nature and is often expressed in the form of a concise mathematical equation. While a law describes what happens, it does not explain the underlying reasons.
It's important to note that neither a theory nor a law is a 'higher' or 'more proven' form of knowledge. They are both highly reliable forms of scientific understanding, but they play different roles. A theory does not evolve into a law with the accumulation of evidence; they continue to exist as separate entities. Furthermore, laws can be modified or overturned if new evidence disproves them, suggesting that they are not absolute. Theories, by their nature, are more complex and can be expanded as new discoveries are made. For example, Newton's second law of motion (F = ma) is a law, while the theory of evolution or theory of relativity are theories that describe a wider range of phenomena.