[taxcontrol]

Nope, for example, we have the law of gravity.

Scientific law: a generalized description, usually expressed in mathematical terms, which describes the empirical behavior of matter.

Isaac Newton knew what gravity did (he could describe its behavior), but he could not explain why gravity did it. Even today the topic of what gravity really is, is an active topic for scientific discussion.

We don't prove theories (and hypotheses) true. We just use the observations to convince ourselves (and others) that we have a good idea. Scientists have a lot of confidence in scientific theories, because they know there is a lot of evidence to back them up.

So in short, law is a formula that will consistently describe the outcome, from a given set of conditions at the start of the situation.

Theory is a generalization with some holes, that attempts to explain why or how, something happened or happens.

[Poser]

"We don't prove theories (and hypotheses) true. We just use the observations to convince ourselves (and others) that we have a good idea. Scientists have a lot of confidence in scientific theories, because they know there is a lot of evidence to back them up."

I thought we used observations to try to disprove the theory. Something about testing the null hypothesis??... It seems to me that you can never prove a theory, but simply fail to disprove it.