Scientific laws summarize the results of experiments or observations, usually in a certain field of application. In general, the accuracy of a law does not change when a new theory of the relevant phenomenon is developed, but the scope of the law, since the mathematics or the statement that the law represents does not change. As with other types of scientific knowledge, scientific laws do not express absolute certainty, as do mathematical theorems or identities. A scientific law may be contradicted, restricted or extended by future observations. Several general properties of scientific laws, especially when they relate to the laws of physics, have been identified. Scientific laws are: A law can usually be formulated in the form of one or more statements or equations in order to be able to predict the outcome of an experiment. The laws differ from the assumptions and assumptions proposed during the scientific process before and during validation by experiment and observation. Assumptions and assumptions are not laws because they have not been verified to the same extent, although they may lead to the formulation of laws. Laws are narrower than scientific theories, which may include one or more laws. [3] Science distinguishes a law or theory from facts. [4] To characterize a law as factual is ambiguous, exaggerated or ambiguous. [5] The nature of scientific laws has been much debated in philosophy, but essentially scientific laws are simply empirical conclusions obtained by scientific methods; They should not be burdened with ontological obligations or statements of logical absolutes. Heisenberg`s uncertainty principle multiplied by the momentum uncertainty is at least half of the reduced Planck constant, similar for time and energy; The term “scientific law” has traditionally been associated with the natural sciences, although the social sciences also contain laws.

[11] For example, Zipf`s law is a law in the social sciences based on mathematical statistics. In these cases, laws may describe general trends or expected behaviours rather than being absolute. The difference between scientific laws and scientific facts is a little more difficult to define, although the definition is important. The facts are simple and fundamental observations that have proven to be true. Laws are generalized observations about a relationship between two or more things in the natural world. The law may be based on facts and tested hypotheses, according to NASA. The action is a functional rather than a function because it depends on the Lagrangian path, and the Lagrangian effect depends on the path q(t), so the action depends on the entire “form” of the path for all times (in the time interval from t1 to t2). There are an infinite number of paths between two moments of time, but the one for which the action is stationary (up to the first order) is the true path.

The stationary value for the entire continuum of Lagrangian values corresponding to a path, and not just a value of the Lagrangian value, is required (in other words, it is not as simple as “differentiate a function and set it to zero, then solve the equations to find the points of maxima and minima, etc.”), but this idea is applied to the whole “form” of the function, For more information about this method, see Calculating Variations). [12] The formula “natural law” first appears as “a living metaphor” favored by the Latin poets Lucretius, Virgil, Ovid and Manilius, and over time acquires a strong theoretical presence in the prose treatises of Seneca and Pliny. Why this Roman origin? According to [classical historian and scholar Daryn] Lehoux [19], the idea was made possible by the central role of codified law and forensic reasoning in Roman life and culture. For the Romans. The place par excellence where ethics, law, nature, religion and politics intersect is the court. When we read Seneca`s Natural Questions and observe again and again how he applies standards of proof, witness evaluation, reasoning and evidence, we can see that we are reading one of the great Roman rhetoricians of his time, completely immersed in forensic methods. And not just Seneca. Legal models of scientific judgment appear everywhere and prove, for example, to be an integral part of Ptolemy`s approach to verification, where the mind is assigned the role of magistrate, the meaning of disclosure of evidence, and dialectical reason that of law itself.

[20] Many scientific laws can be reduced to a mathematical equation. For example, Newton`s law of universal gravity says: The exact formulation of what is now recognized as modern and valid statements of the laws of nature dates back to the 17th century in Europe, with the beginning of precise experimentation and the development of advanced forms of mathematics. During this period, natural philosophers such as Isaac Newton (1642-1727) were influenced by a religious view derived from medieval concepts of divine law that assumed that God had established absolute, universal, and immutable physical laws. [21] [22] In chapter 7 of Le Monde, René Descartes (1596-1650) describes “nature” as matter itself, immutable as created by God, so that the changes in part “are attributable to nature. The rules by which these changes take place are what I call the “laws of nature.” [23] The modern scientific method that was taking shape at the time (with Francis Bacon (1561-1626) and Galileo (1564-1642)) contributed to a tendency to separate science from theology, with minimal speculation about metaphysics and ethics. (Natural law in the political sense, which was conceived as universal (i.e. separate from sectarian religion and coincidences of place), was also elaborated during this period by scholars such as Grotius (1583-1645), Spinoza (1632-1677) and Hobbes (1588-1679). Laws differ from scientific theories in that they do not postulate a mechanism or explanation of phenomena: they are merely distillations of the results of repeated observations.