The "problem" of Induction and conservation laws

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the Problem of Induction (PoI) and its implications for global conservation laws. It establishes that while the PoI suggests there is no logical necessity for nature to remain uniform, many conservation laws can be proven through deductive reasoning, specifically referencing Noether’s theorem. However, the underlying symmetries of these conservation laws lack universal deductive proof. The conversation emphasizes the importance of induction in scientific practice, despite the philosophical challenges posed by the PoI.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of the Problem of Induction (PoI)
  • Familiarity with Noether’s theorem
  • Basic knowledge of conservation laws in physics
  • Awareness of the scientific method and its principles
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the implications of Noether’s theorem on conservation laws
  • Study the philosophical arguments surrounding the Problem of Induction
  • Explore the relationship between induction and scientific methodology
  • Investigate various conservation laws and their deductive proofs
USEFUL FOR

Philosophers, physicists, and anyone interested in the foundations of scientific reasoning and the implications of induction in scientific practice.

TCO
Messages
7
Reaction score
2
TL;DR
Induction and conservation laws
If we by induction in the scientific method mean:

"that the future will resemble the past" and The Problem of Induction states:

"There is no logical necessity forcing nature to remain uniform"

does The Problem of Induction implies violation of (global) conservation laws?
 
  • Skeptical
Likes   Reactions: weirdoguy and PeroK
Physics news on Phys.org
TCO said:
"that the future will resemble the past"
"There is no logical necessity forcing nature to remain uniform"
Can you cite credible references that state these definitions of "induction in the scientific method" and "the problem of induction"? Thanks.
 
TCO said:
does The Problem of Induction implies violation of (global) conservation laws?
Not necessarily, as many conservation laws can be proven deductively - this is Noether’s theorem. But this just pushes the problem down one level; there’s no deductive argument that the symmetries underlying a conservation law must be universal.

The PoI is an interesting and important philosophical problem but it is out of scope for PF. We’re here to discuss how science is generally practiced, and “proceed on the assumption that induction generally works” is an essential part of that practice.

This thread is closed under the forum rule about not hosting philosophy discussions.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Ivan Nikiforov, Bystander, TCO and 1 other person

Similar threads

  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K