Often something is said to violate the Laws of Physics; or it is impossible, because that would violate the Laws of Physics. It is as though there is some sort of police force that makes physics follow the rules.
We give more weight to “laws” of science than is warranted. A “law” is simply an observation that a phenomenon exists, where there are few or no exceptions. We speak of the Law of Gravity. When we release an object we’re holding, it almost always falls down. There are exceptions, such as helium balloons, but in general this “law” holds. We have discovered equations that describe the motion of objects under gravity. These equations can give precise results. For hundreds of years, these equations, developed by Isaac Newton, held true. They gave precise descriptions of how an object moves when affected by gravity. Except… well, Mercury was being difficult.
For some reason, Newton’s equations didn’t accurately predict the motion of Mercury around the Sun. This discrepancy was so great that it was assumed that another planet must be affecting Mercury’s orbit. Sadly, no such planet was ever discovered.
In 1915, Einstein published his General Theory of Relativity. His equations accurately described how Mercury moves. It was one of the predictions that helped confirm the theory. So Newton’s “law” wasn’t quite right. Close enough for almost all work with missiles and planets, but inaccurate under certain circumstances.
There are the so-called Laws of Thermodynamics. These are observations of how matter and energy behave. They include such vital concepts as Conservation of energy. You don’t get out of a system more energy than you put into it. It forbids perpetual motion, among other things. As far as I know, these observations – “Laws” – have never been observed to fail. Anyone who claims to have invented a perpetual motion machine would be rejected because that would violate the Laws of Thermodynamics.
And yet, our concept of “laws” is our own. We observe and form conclusions. Sometimes our conclusions hold indefinitely – we never find exceptions to them. That doesn’t mean that exceptions are impossible; only that we have not (yet) observed them. There is no particular reason why an exception could not occur. We simply make that assumption in certain cases. Such assumptions are necessary to simplify our efforts to understand the Universe. The assumptions are not always true.
So while it may be useful to consider certain observations as immutable, as “Laws,” we should always keep in mind that new data could change that at any moment. Laws are useful, but not necessarily inviolable..
The Laws of Physics
Often something is said to violate the Laws of Physics; or it is impossible, because that would violate the Laws of Physics. It is as though there is some sort of police force that makes physics follow the rules.
We give more weight to “laws” of science than is warranted. A “law” is simply an observation that a phenomenon exists, where there are few or no exceptions. We speak of the Law of Gravity. When we release an object we’re holding, it almost always falls down. There are exceptions, such as helium balloons, but in general this “law” holds. We have discovered equations that describe the motion of objects under gravity. These equations can give precise results. For hundreds of years, these equations, developed by Isaac Newton, held true. They gave precise descriptions of how an object moves when affected by gravity. Except… well, Mercury was being difficult.
For some reason, Newton’s equations didn’t accurately predict the motion of Mercury around the Sun. This discrepancy was so great that it was assumed that another planet must be affecting Mercury’s orbit. Sadly, no such planet was ever discovered.
In 1915, Einstein published his General Theory of Relativity. His equations accurately described how Mercury moves. It was one of the predictions that helped confirm the theory. So Newton’s “law” wasn’t quite right. Close enough for almost all work with missiles and planets, but inaccurate under certain circumstances.
There are the so-called Laws of Thermodynamics. These are observations of how matter and energy behave. They include such vital concepts as Conservation of energy. You don’t get out of a system more energy than you put into it. It forbids perpetual motion, among other things. As far as I know, these observations – “Laws” – have never been observed to fail. Anyone who claims to have invented a perpetual motion machine would be rejected because that would violate the Laws of Thermodynamics.
And yet, our concept of “laws” is our own. We observe and form conclusions. Sometimes our conclusions hold indefinitely – we never find exceptions to them. That doesn’t mean that exceptions are impossible; only that we have not (yet) observed them. There is no particular reason why an exception could not occur. We simply make that assumption in certain cases. Such assumptions are necessary to simplify our efforts to understand the Universe. The assumptions are not always true.
So while it may be useful to consider certain observations as immutable, as “Laws,” we should always keep in mind that new data could change that at any moment. Laws are useful, but not necessarily inviolable..