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] strange things in chem book



But laws do not have to be universally true. A law is valid within a range
of application such as the ideal gas law. Herein lies the confusion.
People tend to think a law is "universal truth" when the word law is merely
an expression of the usage and derivation of the equation or priciple.
Should F_f= mu F_N be a law? Why not it is just as valid within its range
of application as Ohm's law or Newton's law of universal gravitation.
Hooke's law is valid within a range of extensions and fails when the spring
is stretched beyond its elastic limit.

Unfortunately the scientific usage of the word law is often taken to mean an
absolute similar to God's laws or the 10 (15?) commandments. But even in
moral terms shouldn't the golden rule be the golden law?

I don't know who originally wrote that theories turn into laws when proven,
but it is likely the author of the 5 step scientific method, possibly Roger
Bacon. I would be interested in finding out who it might be.

Incidentally the Wikipedia article agrees with this definition of law, but I
find its explanation of scientific method to be quite a bit out of date. It
does not quote Kuhn.

John M. Clement
Houston, TX


Absolutely false. To call "Newton's Law of Universal
Gravitation" a law is false. It's not even true, we have had
a more accurate explanation for gravity since 1916: General
Relativity. That too is not a final answer, since it
demonstrably disagrees with quantum mechanics.