Dewey noticed that when he put a newly washed glass rim down on a plate, soap bubbles grew out of the rim of the glass, held their shapes for a short period, and then receded back into the glass. It was turned upside down and placed on a cold plate, so that a puddle of soapy water was formed under the glass. Given the above, the warm air in the glass expanded, forcing soap bubbles to form and grow. Contact with the cold plate caused the air in the glass to cool, and the bubbles to contract. This looks promising at first, but, as I will show, scientific theories can not be explained in strictly deductive terms.
Induction is a bit more complicated.
Inductive inferences are considered ampliative. We can gain new knowledge by means of induction, though we lose a measure of certainty in the process. Gravity will work tomorrow we are able to make a comment about tomorrow, something that we could not do given the limitations of deductive inference. The problem is, as Hume pointed out, we have no logical reason to be certain that the future will resemble the past. But it does mean that the premises of an inductive argument could be true, and the conclusion could still be false.