I know that way of looking at them is neither useful nor meaningful. Where were the laws before we figured them out? What happens when we find a law, that we thought was universal, in fact isn't, like the law of conservation of matter? Were we given a defective law, or did we think we had a law that wasn't a law? If the latter is true, how do we know there are any laws at all?
#####I know that way of looking at them is neither useful nor meaningful. Where were the laws before we figured them out?#####
Assuming they exist, they were there before we figured them out. However, it's doubtful we've even scratched the surface of 0.0001% of all the knowledge of the universe.
#####What happens when we find a law, that we thought was universal, in fact isn't, like the law of conservation of matter? Were we given a defective law, or did we think we had a law that wasn't a law?#####
I would assume the latter. However, it's only an assumption. Likewise, it's an assumption that there's a God who designed the universe to work in certain ways, and an assumption that there isn't such a God. I see no reason why science should require the latter assumption.
#####If the latter is true, how do we know there are any laws at all?#####
Maybe there aren't any laws. Maybe all the laws we currently think inviolable, aren't. Our knowledge of the universe is very primitive, limited, and superficial. We can't rule out the possibility that today's most brilliant scientists and their most trusted theories won't be discarded as passe nonsense two centuries from now. That's why it's always good to keep an open mind and not just declare the prevailing orthodoxy to be a settled issue that we must all rally around or be declared boobs. :-)