Two points of information.
1. The most important step in the scientific method is the dissemination of information. Without peer-reviewed publications there would be no progress made in any of the sciences. You need to publish your results for the whole world to look at and critique and/or replicate (or not replicate).
2. How does "theory" appear in step five out-of-the-blue, so to speak? The flow of the explanation of the scientific method breaks down at this point, in my opinion. Perhaps you should add to step five something about how the many experiments designed to answer the many aspects of the hypothesis leads to a pattern in nature that provides explanatory power for the original observation. And that this explanation (theory) is the framework to which future observations, hypotheses, experiments, and predictions can be compared.
After further testing using acceptable scientific standards a phenomena may become reproducibile under certain conditions, and become a scientific law.
I think that´s wrong. The biggest difference between a law and a theory is that a theory is much more complex and dynamic. A law governs a single action, whereas a theory explains a whole series of related phenomena.
A Neutral example would be the Law of Gravity and the Theory of Gravity which still exists and is in discussion.
I think partiality is the main goal on Wiki. Right?
Technically the term 'law' is no longer used, and was only ever used for those parts of a theory which were amenable to definition as simple equations. Theories no longer get promoted to laws (no germ law of disease, for instance).
Roy 13:07, 6 Jun 2005 (GMT)