What is a true law of physics(q)

reany@asu.edu (Patrick Reany) wrote in message news:<844a1b64.0302070508.4cbdc362@posting.google.com>... > Anyone care to give a true definition of what is meant by either a > "law of physics" or a "general law of physics"? > > Patrick > > The 'true' vs the 'good'?

'Law of physics' is an antiquated term. Now a days, it is better to call them theories of physics, since most of them, are bounded to be replaced by better ones in the future.

A viable way to 'measure' the power of a theory is to take ratio of the number of successful predictions to the number of assumptions of the theory.

For example, suppose you( not you as a person, just anybody) claim that martians live in a invisible band of energy. and once i start probing you why us humans are unable to see them. And you start giving me explanations like they cannot be seen because of they live in a different energy band. And i ask you well, why do not our powerful instruments detect them. And you invent another explantion to say why it cannot be done. And before you know it, you will have invented hundered(or even thousands) of assumptions to explain your findings. Whereas i could just say martians do not exist. And all our observations agree with that. Comparing the power of explanation, i win :-)

A better criteria of theory, is how 'mechanically', it can convert a given problem into an observable solution.

For example, consider newton's law and most of your high school physics assignements. You would have noticed that using netwon's law, you can turn the problem into a set of equations. This is what makes a theory appealing (atleast to me).

suresh