Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: freedumb2003
True — but in trying to find those fundamentals, science needs to rely on a consistent and physical Universe . . . Science operates from the assumption there is one set of rules

I think that's generally true for nature around us, but those constants break down--for instance, we know that Newton's laws of motion don't apply to sub-atomic particles. Everything else does, but subatomic particles don't. Why? Don't know. But they don't. So you can't rely on Newton's laws to explain those things. Same is also true for space. We know enough to know that Space doesn't follow our rules.

85 posted on 03/20/2009 9:57:13 AM PDT by Publius Valerius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies ]


To: Publius Valerius
I think that's generally true for nature around us, but those constants break down--for instance, we know that Newton's laws of motion don't apply to sub-atomic particles. Everything else does, but subatomic particles don't. Why? Don't know. But they don't. So you can't rely on Newton's laws to explain those things. Same is also true for space. We know enough to know that Space doesn't follow our rules.

That's the point: when we find the rules don't apply, we try to ascertain what the newly discovered rules are. Things like quantum physics are tools to help discern what the true underlying rules are. Just as Einsteinian rules supplanted Newtonian, new rules are being discovered that poke holes in some aspects of Einstein's.

Space may not follow our rules but it follows some rules.

87 posted on 03/20/2009 10:25:39 AM PDT by freedumb2003 (Communism comes to America: 1/20/2009. Keep your powder dry, folks.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson