Chronology Current Month Current Thread Current Date
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Prev] [Date Next]

Re: [Phys-l] nature of science



Also there's the law of conservation of energy, tho Peter Redmond always called it "the energy principle".

Would it help students to call all such laws principles?

bc

David Bowman wrote:

Regarding BC's vote:


I vote for RC's initial statement, i.e. a law is a functional
statement, e.g. square law capacitor, his example [F = GmM/r^2],
Hooke, etc. And a theory is an explanation. [This is bare bones.]


Consider the third *law* of thermodynamics. What is the functional
statement here? How is an unattainable limit an equation or
functional form?

I suspect that maybe the idea of a law is that it is some short
statement (maybe usually mathematical in form) of some aspect of the
brute fact way nature is observed to operate. A law does not attempt
to explain the behavior; it just succinctly describes it. I agree
that a theory is an explanatory framework erected for the purpose of
explaining some domain of the facts of nature.

David Bowman

_______________________________________________
Forum for Physics Educators
Phys-l@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu
https://carnot.physics.buffalo.edu/mailman/listinfo/phys-l