How do we know the laws of physics aren't gonna change randomly in the future?
>>16997697Cosmologically? I don't think there's a good way to test or know if we live in a Universe that's in a stable configuration, or if it's instead in a temporary bubble of stability in an unstable.. vacuum?If reality changes, then models and observation will have to be modified to fit accordingly.The laws and models are descriptions or assumptions about reality, they are not reality itself. These are hypothetical constructs and heuristicsOf course physics will change as we learn more. But I don't think reality is confined to fit our attempts to describe it.(not a physycist)
>>16997739>I don't think there's a good way to test or know*at the moment>models and observation will have to be modified to fit accordingly.models and laws* will have to be updated or investigated in accordance to new data or observations
The laws of reality changing would likely be devastating for our continued existence. We don't know just how fine an island of stability we are in. It may be that a tiny change results in all or some of our chemical machinery becoming non viable. Which would be A Bad Thing from the perspective of those who selfishly want to keep living.
>>16997697>How do we know the laws of physics aren't gonna change randomly in the future?They change all the time, and so does reality, so you dont notice.
>>16997697What is this humor.
>>16997774source?
>>16997697Because Christ Logos is faithful to us, even when we are not faithful to Him.
>>16997783>source?I would post it, but since reality changed you would not longer understand it.
>>16997697>randomly
>>16997697Because there is no God that could change it on a whim, so it continues unchanged
They wouldnt change "randomly" (because that is just dumb nothing is random, all effects have a cause) but I suspect, with very good evidence to support it, that they do in fact change with certain cosmic and planetary alignments. Perhaps even merging multiple dimensions into a single dimension, or at least making them accessible to the inhabitants of each one
>>16998064>but I did have breakfast this morningInability to entertain a hypothetical is the sign of being a nigger.
>>16997697We don't. How could we possibly know that?
>>16998601>bizarre non-sequiturup your dosage, the meds arent working
>>16998730Stop using my name>>16998601Yeah you're right actually. I'm a fucking retard.
>>16999022At least you're able to admit it.
>>16997697We know it statistically. The laws have never been recorded changing for 100% of their trials, so the odds go to zero. Assuming they will change is an ill advised bet and if that's your strategy, the odds you will be mistaken are 100%. Fine for an intellectual exercise. Terrible if you're doing something that actually matters.
>>16997697Two plus two would still equal four even if gravitation were .01% weaker, so we can assume that the same logical necessitity that instantiates mathematical laws also form the precise and coherent laws of physical reality, and could be fundamentally immutable.>What if space turned into spaghetti, guys?
