Difference between rule and law in physics

[Puneeth423]

Why is it that Newtons laws of motion and not Newtons rules of motion?
Why is it that Fleming's right hand rule and not Fleming's right hand law?

 

[Drakkith]

From wiki:

A scientific law is a statement based on repeated experimental observation that describes some aspect of the world. A scientific law always applies under the same conditions, and implies that there is a causal relationship involving its elements. Factual and well-confirmed statements like "Mercury is liquid at standard temperature and pressure" are considered to be too specific to qualify as scientific laws. A central problem in the philosophy of science, going back to David Hume, is that of distinguishing causal relationships (such as those implied by laws) from principles that arise due to constant conjunction.[1]

Laws differ from scientific theories in that they do not posit a mechanism or explanation of phenomena: they are merely distillations of the results of repeated observation. As such, a law is limited in applicability to circumstances resembling those already observed, and may be found to be false when extrapolated. Ohm's law only applies to linear networks, Newton's law of universal gravitation only applies in weak gravitational fields, the early laws of aerodynamics such as Bernoulli's principle do not apply in case of compressible flow such as occurs in transonic and supersonic flight, Hooke's law only applies to strain below the elastic limit, etc. These laws remain useful, but only under the conditions where they apply.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_law

I don't think "scientific rule" is any different from a law.

 

[russ_watters]

I do: a rule would just be a convention.

 

[Jimmy Snyder]

Toss Fermi's Golden Rule in there too. Newton's Laws, but Einstein's postulates, and Heisenberg's principle. I can't think of other names for laws, can you? Some don't even get any designation, like Hubble expansion. The pattern is, there is no pattern.

 

[zoobyshoe]

It's clear from the definitions and examples of both words that a rule governs what a physicist should do to determine something and a law is a description of what nature will do. Newton's Laws tell us what objects in motion do. Flemming's Rule tells us what physicists should do to to determine the directions of field, current, and motion.

 

[BobG]

Russ is right.

Laws explain how physical things behave under certain conditions.

Rules have to do with communicating with other people. If we all follow the same practices (right hand rule to figure out which direction of rotation is positive and which is negative, for example), then it's easier to understand what that negative sign actually means, etc.