Question about Science - Marc Lange responds

Look at what I've just read on the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy: "There are no laws of nature that hold just for the planet Earth (or the Andromeda Galaxy, for that matter), nor are there any
Philosophy News image
Look at what I've just read on the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy: "There are no laws of nature that hold just for the planet Earth (or the Andromeda Galaxy, for that matter), nor are there any that hold just for the Eighteenth Century or just for the Mesozoic Era." I agree that this looks absolutely true, but why is it so? I suppose science cannot prove that there is no fundamental law of physics that holds only in a small part of the universe or only during some short period. Sure, such a law would be unexplainable, at least scientifically unexplainable, but aren't ALL fundamental laws of physics unexplainable? That's why they are fundamental. If the above quotation is only stipulating some meaning of "laws of natures", isn't it arbitrary? Thank you. Response from: Marc Lange I just wanted to add to Allen's remarks (with which I largely agree).First, the claim that there are no laws of nature that hold just for (e.g.) the planet Earth may require the qualification "no. . .

Continue reading . . .

News source: AskPhilosophers.org | "All"

blog comments powered by Disqus