Laws in Physics

European Review 22:S33-S49 (2014)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

What are laws of nature? During much of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries Newton’s laws of motion were taken to be the paradigm of scientific laws thought to constitute universal and necessary eternal truths. But since the turn of the twentieth century we know that Newton’s laws are not universally valid. Does this mean that their status as laws of physics has changed? Have we discovered that the principles, which were once thought to be laws of nature, are not in fact laws?

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive

External links

  • This entry has no external links. Add one.
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

In defense of psychological laws.Martin Carrier - 1998 - International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 12 (3):217-232.
The Status of Laws of Nature in the Philosophy of Leibniz.Karen R. Zwier - 2011 - Proceedings of the American Catholic Philosophical Association 85:149-160.
Book Reviews.M. L. G. Redhead - 1983 - New York: Oxford University Press.
Laws of nature.Fred I. Dretske - 1977 - Philosophy of Science 44 (2):248-268.
Biology and a priori laws.Mehmet Elgin - 2003 - Philosophy of Science 70 (5):1380--1389.

Analytics

Added to PP
2012-09-05

Downloads
11 (#2,043,750)

6 months
11 (#1,075,311)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Mathias Frisch
Universität Hannover

Citations of this work

The Nomic Likelihood Account of Laws.Christopher J. G. Meacham - 2023 - Ergo: An Open Access Journal of Philosophy 9 (9):230-284.
The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Physics in Mathematics.Daniele Molinini - 2023 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 74 (4):853-874.
Hume and the Laws of Nature.Michael Jacovides - 2022 - Hume Studies 46 (1):3-31.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references