[Old_Mil]

Explain how Newton's Laws got replaced by Einstein's theory.

Newton's laws haven't been replaced by Einstein's Theory of Relativity - they are subsets of the same that hold true for a given reference frame. Incidentally, we're getting pretty close to the point where we can declare Einstein's "theory" a "law" don't you think?

[Right Wing Professor]

Incidentally, we're getting pretty close to the point where we can declare Einstein's "theory" a "law" don't you think?

Only if we don't know what theories and laws are. Hint: a law is not what a theory becomes when it grows up.

[js1138]

Incidentally, we're getting pretty close to the point where we can declare Einstein's "theory" a "law" don't you think?

No, I don't. But you have conceded the principle that a theory can supersede a law in science. Laws are generally formulas used by engineers. Theories are explanatory.

[RadioAstronomer]

Einstein's "theory" a "law" don't you think?

Theories do not become laws.

[donh]

Newton's laws haven't been replaced by Einstein's Theory of Relativity - they are subsets of the same that hold true for a given reference frame.

This statement reeks. Newton's and Einstein's universes imply two radically different, generally contradictory "reference frames". We hang onto Newton's laws because they are computationally cheap approximations that will serve in most low-cost earthbound circumstances, not because they constitute a proper subset of Einstein's laws.