B How do we know our laws of physics are correct? (1 Viewer)

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

I was just curious to know, how do we know our laws of physics are correct? How do we know the laws about time or space aren't overruled (we say time flows forward, but how do we know that it cant skip back or flow backwards), because we just haven't seen it or can't perceive it?
 

phyzguy

Science Advisor
4,023
1,050
Define "correct". We know our laws of physics are an accurate description of the universe because we have done a huge number of measurements and observations to validate them. Does your computer work? It was designed with our known laws of physics and wouldn't work if our physics models weren't reasonably accurate. How about your GPS tracker? Same comment. Do the space probes we launch toward the toward the planets actually arrive there? They wouldn't if our models were even slightly off. I could go on, but I think I've made my point.
 
Define "correct". We know our laws of physics are an accurate description of the universe because we have done a huge number of measurements and observations to validate them. Does your computer work? It was designed with our known laws of physics and wouldn't work if our physics models weren't reasonably accurate. How about your GPS tracker? Same comment. Do the space probes we launch toward the toward the planets actually arrive there? They wouldn't if our models were even slightly off. I could go on, but I think I've made my point.
Well, by correct I mean, are they universally correct, and have they always been correct. Like can a law, let's pick a random one, the second law of thermodynamics, be overrules or proven wrong, yet we just haven't seen it been proven wrong yet. Apply this to bigger things like time itself, physicists say there is a flow to time, it always flows forward, how do we know that it can't flow backwards, or hell, skip forward or skip backwards, but we just haven't seen it yet?
 

phyzguy

Science Advisor
4,023
1,050
Well, by correct I mean, are they universally correct, and have they always been correct. Like can a law, let's pick a random one, the second law of thermodynamics, be overrules or proven wrong, yet we just haven't seen it been proven wrong yet. Apply this to bigger things like time itself, physicists say there is a flow to time, it always flows forward, how do we know that it can't flow backwards, or hell, skip forward or skip backwards, but we just haven't seen it yet?
I would say we know that none of our laws of physics are "universally correct", if by this you mean that they apply exactly in every circumstance. All of our laws of physics have domains in which they are accurate to some verified level of accuracy, and domains in which they fail.
 
I would say we know that none of our laws of physics are "universally correct", if by this you mean that they apply exactly in every circumstance. All of our laws of physics have domains in which they are accurate to some verified level of accuracy, and domains in which they fail.
When you say 'domains in where they fail' are you referring to extreme domains, like inside a black hole and stuff? But really what I meant was, how do we know laws that we assume are correct in a domain are just incorrect? Like how can we be sure time always flows forward? (I use time as it is an easy example and we experience it every day).
 

phyzguy

Science Advisor
4,023
1,050
When you say 'domains in where they fail' are you referring to extreme domains, like inside a black hole and stuff? But really what I meant was, how do we know laws that we assume are correct in a domain are just incorrect? Like how can we be sure time always flows forward? (I use time as it is an easy example and we experience it every day).
I'm not sure what you are asking. I've never experienced time flowing backwards, and I don't think you or anyone else has either. If you are asking, "How do we know that are laws of physics that are valid today will still be valid in the future?", the answer is that we don't. It is a basic postulate of physics that the same laws of physics that we experience here on Earth at this time are valid throughout the universe and for all times. This postulate has been extraordinarily successful at describing what we see.
 
I'm not sure what you are asking. I've never experienced time flowing backwards, and I don't think you or anyone else has either. If you are asking, "How do we know that are laws of physics that are valid today will still be valid in the future?", the answer is that we don't. It is a basic postulate of physics that the same laws of physics that we experience here on Earth at this time are valid throughout the universe and for all times. This postulate has been extraordinarily successful at describing what we see.
Yeah, that's what I meant, will the laws we see as correct today, be correct in the future? Like, Newtonian physics was proven wrong by Einstein. So, how do we know the same won't happen to our laws now?
 

phyzguy

Science Advisor
4,023
1,050
Yeah, that's what I meant, will the laws we see as correct today, be correct in the future? Like, Newtonian physics was proven wrong by Einstein.
Newtonian physics was not "proven wrong". It is an excellent model of our universe within its domain of applicability and is used to great effect by millions of people every day. You should read the following insights article:

https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/classical-physics-is-wrong-fallacy/

So, how do we know the same won't happen to our laws now?
Our current laws of physics will almost certainly be improved upon in the future. We certainly expect (and hope!) that there will be better models in the future with greater accuracy and larger regimes of applicability.
 
Newtonian physics was not "proven wrong". It is an excellent model of our universe within its domain of applicability and is used to great effect by millions of people every day. You should read the following insights article:

https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/classical-physics-is-wrong-fallacy/



Our current laws of physics will almost certainly be improved upon in the future. We certainly expect (and hope!) that there will be better models in the future with greater accuracy and larger regimes of applicability.
So basically, our laws of physics which we observe to be correct can't be wrong, just proved upon in the future. Its not like the second law of thermodynamics can suddenly be proven wrong in the future, but it could be improved from what it is. Would I be correct?
 

Vanadium 50

Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Education Advisor
22,376
4,704
How do we know reindeer can't fly?
 

jbriggs444

Science Advisor
6,881
2,238
So we can safely say all our current laws are correct?
What kind of confidence are you looking for? We bet our lives every day on things that we know with a good deal less reliability. How do you know that the brakes in your car still work today?

Our laws of physics are well tested within the regimes available for experimentation. That is as good as it gets.
 
27,180
3,813
Like, Newtonian physics was proven wrong by Einstein. So, how do we know the same won't happen to our laws now?
Newtonian physics was not proven wrong by Einstein. Newtonian physics is part of relativity, specifically the v<<c part. So relativity can not prove it wrong.

All of the centuries of experimental evidence supporting Newtonian physics still holds in the respective domains of the experiments. That is why Newtonian physics is still taught in school. Newtonian physics is right, in the Newtonian domain.

So we can safely say all our current laws are correct?
Yes, they are all correct in the domain where they have been experimentally validated.

At this point your question has been answered repeatedly.
 
Last edited:
126
16
If you cannot see the sun due to cloud, does it prove that its not there?

There is nothing like absolute truth.

You may say that if a car on ground in earth accelerates in forward direction, it will go back. You may develop the math as well. Stretch the fact to n dimensions or something. But in this space/domain will any car follow such law? At least in any space we know?

Any other observer will see that the car will always go forward. Hence your equation does not match with experiment thus incorrect.

This establishes that physics is RELATIVE, physical laws are developed for THIS DIMENSION only(we cannot develop physical equations without knowing data from other simension) EXPERIMENTS/OBSERVATIONS MUST MATCH EQUATIONS developed for a particular dimension.
Together with all DATA we prove that the laws are Correct.

Try this, if a is a natural number then a>0. Prove there exists an a<0.No one knowns the complete N set. There can be!

If you can't generate any counter example then it is implied that if a is in N then it is always greater 0.

Same for Physics, generate enough data/evidence to show that physical equations are incorrect,if you cannot then it is implied that laws are correct and you are wrong.
 

sophiecentaur

Science Advisor
Gold Member
22,490
3,440
So we can safely say all our current laws are correct?
You are just re-stating your OP, slightly differently. Is there any reason, other than 'mischief' that is keeping you on this course? You are using the word "correct" in an imprecise way and there is no answer until you say exactly what you mean by it. In the terms of "Science", the laws are 'correct'. In your terms (as yet unspecified) they could be 'incorrect'. But what does that say about your terms?
If you have a problem with the scientific attitude then that is a separate issue. Many people feel excluded from the club of Science because they find the ultra careful and formal way the Laws are stated is too hard to follow. That's a personal problem for them and not a problem for 'Science'.
 
Last edited:
You are just re-stating your OP, slightly differently. Is there any reason, eight than 'mischief' that is keeping you on this course? You are using the word "correct" in an imprecise way and there is no answer until you say exactly what you mean by it. In the terms of "Science", the laws are 'correct'. In your terms (as yet unspecified) they could be 'incorrect'. But what does that say about your terms?
If you have a problem with the scientific attitude then that is a separate issue. Many people feel excluded from the club of Science because they find the ultra careful and formal way the Laws are stated is too hard to follow. That's a personal problem for them and not a problem for 'Science'.
Sorry, I meant correct as in, are they just correct for now, for what we know, and will they be proven incorrect in future when we get more knowledge, like how Newtonian physics, I thought was incorrect, but I was proven wrong, it was just improved upon.
 
126
16
Science because they find the ultra careful and formal way the Laws
Laws/Theorems must be precise, concise, independent of what is being defined and formal.

Science always has been and always will be a dense network of closely related ideas made simple through laws and equations.
This is the most simplification we can achieve and we should.

You cannot spell CAT without knowing what is C, A, T and how to make meaningful words with it.
 

The Physics Forums Way

We Value Quality
• Topics based on mainstream science
• Proper English grammar and spelling
We Value Civility
• Positive and compassionate attitudes
• Patience while debating
We Value Productivity
• Disciplined to remain on-topic
• Recognition of own weaknesses
• Solo and co-op problem solving
Top