The origin of natural LAWS?!

[TranceNRG]

I have often read that everything occurs the way it does due to natural laws, i.e. laws of physics, laws of Chemistry, Biological laws, mathematical laws and etc.

However, I have rarely (if ever) read about the origin of these laws.

How did such precise and accurate laws that govern our world come to be?

As a religious person, I can assume the answers that religious people may give. However, I am more interested, to hear the opinions of non-religious people.

I'm curious to know what answers could be given from an atheistic point of view, aside from "chance" and "just because..."

Lastly, I hope this doesn't turn into a "I'm right and you're wrong" type of discussion. Since I honestly just want to learn about different opinions and perspectives on this issue.




Thanks

[Beatitude]

There are theories that there are innumerable universes in different dimensions other than our own and that those different dimensions operate under completely different laws. That doesn't answer the question, since even with the multiverse theory you can still ask the same question- but that's something being speculated just the same.

[JBDW]

Hm..off the top of my head, I suppose the most obvious answer would be the BB. But that wouldn't be quite what you're looking for, right? (Not to mention, I haven't really thought this through, just tossing it out there).

[DaCougarMech]

electrons are electronegative and protons are positive

this means that large nuclei are very electropositive

therefore something like a water molecule will be polar because the nucleus of the oxygen atom will exert a stronger pull on the electrons of the hydrogen atom than the nucleus of the hydrogen atom

this means the hydrogen atom will be relatively positively charged while the oxygen atom will be relatively negatively charged

this itself is insignificant on the scale of the individual atom, but in bulk it gives rise to hydrogen bonding and and high increase in the boiling point of a relatively small molecule

plants use this to their advantage by building small tracheids and vessels that exert a force on the water molecules so that as the water molecules evaporate out of the leaves, they pull on the water molecules behind them like chains




take this as a lesson about the universe. small forces build up to everything we see

[TranceNRG]

Hm..off the top of my head, I suppose the most obvious answer would be the BB. But that wouldn't be quite what you're looking for, right? (Not to mention, I haven't really thought this through, just tossing it out there).

BB = Big Bang?

But for Big Bang to occur, there must have been laws already in place, i.e. law of gravity, laws of force, laws of motion and many other physical laws that guided the expansion and formation of the universe.

Right?

It has been said that if the numbers were off by just a few milliseconds, the universe would've collapsed.

[TranceNRG]

There are theories that there are innumerable universes in different dimensions other than our own and that those different dimensions operate under completely different laws. That doesn't answer the question, since even with the multiverse theory you can still ask the same question- but that's something being speculated just the same.

Same question applies to them as well...
Where did the laws that govern their existence come from? and how?

[DaCougarMech]

BB = Big Bang?

But for Big Bang to occur, there must have been laws already in place, i.e. law of gravity, laws of force, laws of motion and many other physical laws that guided the expansion and formation of the universe.

Right?

It has been said that if the numbers were off by just a few milliseconds, the universe would've collapsed.

Same question applies to them as well...
Where did the laws that govern their existence come from? and how?

as i tried to explain, there are only a few or perhaps 1 fundamental force in the universe

everything else is just the interactions of the law/laws

where it comes from is not something that can be currently explained because as far as anyone knows, it just existed

[TranceNRG]

electrons are electronegative and protons are positive

this means that large nuclei are very electropositive

therefore something like a water molecule will be polar because the nucleus of the oxygen atom will exert a stronger pull on the electrons of the hydrogen atom than the nucleus of the hydrogen atom

this means the hydrogen atom will be relatively positively charged while the oxygen atom will be relatively negatively charged

this itself is insignificant on the scale of the individual atom, but in bulk it gives rise to hydrogen bonding and and high increase in the boiling point of a relatively small molecule

plants use this to their advantage by building small tracheids and vessels that exert a force on the water molecules so that as the water molecules evaporate out of the leaves, they pull on the water molecules behind them like chains


take this as a lesson about the universe. small forces build up to everything we see

Right, but you skipped a step.

I'm asking where and how did the laws of force, gravity, electromagnetism and many more come to be?


For example, how was the law the govern opposite attraction in atoms, come to be? In other words, when and why positives and negatives begin to attract one another?


I'm question the origin of the cause, not the effect due to the cause (laws).

as i tried to explain, there are only a few or perhaps 1 fundamental force in the universe

everything else is just the interactions of the law/laws

Yes... and I am asking about the origin of the laws.
How did these laws that interact and in turn govern our universe, come to be?

and is this fundamental force bound to the physical laws of force?

[DaCougarMech]

Right, but you skipped a step.

I'm asking where and how did the laws of force, gravity, electromagnetism and many more come to be?


For example, how was the law the govern opposite attraction in atoms, come to be? In other words, when and why positives and negatives begin to attract one another?


I'm question the origin of the cause, not the effect due to the cause (laws).



Yes... and I am asking about the origin of the laws.
How did these laws that interact and in turn govern our universe, come to be?

and is this fundamental force bound to the physical laws of force?

and what i was trying to illustrate is that we dont know yet

it's like asking what humans are made of without microscopes and the knowledge of cells

the answer is "too small to see"



and no. the fundamental force is the CAUSE behind physical forces

[TranceNRG]

and what i was trying to illustrate is that we dont know yet

it's like asking what humans are made of without microscopes and the knowledge of cells

the answer is "too small to see"

OK cool.
So, you hold the opinion that we do not know how such precise and accurate laws that govern our universe came to be. But (I assume, correct me if I'm wrong) you believe that such laws cannot be the creation of an intelligent law-maker/designer. correct?

and no. the fundamental force is the CAUSE behind physical forces

Interesting.
So, a metaphysical/supernatural force?

[Weightaholic]

The rules are as they are because were they to be different, the universe would be very very different, and perhaps beings of energy would be having this argument via thought waves, and not via the internet.

It's like the example of a puddle considering a hole was dug especially to fit it, as it fits so perfectly within the hole.

[DaCougarMech]

OK cool.
So, you hold the opinion that we do not know how such precise and accurate laws that govern our universe came to be. But (I assume, correct me if I'm wrong) you believe that such laws cannot be the creation of an intelligent law-maker/designer. correct?

no. i just find it unnecessary to conclude it as so if we dont even know what they are yet. i have my reasons for not believing in an "intelligent law-maker/designer" but that's for another thread

Interesting.
So, a metaphysical/supernatural force?

i believe it to be THE force

[TranceNRG]

no. i just find it unnecessary to conclude it as so if we dont even know what they are yet. i have my reasons for not believing in an "intelligent law-maker/designer" but that's for another thread

i believe it to be THE force

Ok Cool.
Thank you for stating your opinion.

[TranceNRG]

The rules are as they are because were they to be different, the universe would be very very different, and perhaps beings of energy would be having this argument via thought waves, and not via the internet.

It's like the example of a puddle considering a hole was dug especially to fit it, as it fits so perfectly within the hole.

Right, but you skipped a step.

Let us say, as you said, that these laws seem perfect to us like the hole and the puddle.

However, what I am asking is how did these laws come to be in the first place?
How did the hole come to be in the first place?

The fact is that these laws exist and have existed ever since the universe has existed.
In fact, since they governed/govern the expansion and the formation of the universe, right at the point of big bang and onward, one could think that perhaps, they came into existence before the big bang itself. Right?

[Weightaholic]

Right, but you skipped a step.

Let us say, as you said, that these laws seem perfect to us like the hole and the puddle.

However, what I am asking is how did these laws come to be in the first place?
How did the hole come to be in the first place?

The fact is that these laws exist and have existed ever since the universe has existed.
In fact, since they governed/govern the expansion and the formation of the universe, right at the point of big bang and onward, one could think that perhaps, they came into existence before the big bang itself. Right?

I didn't skip a step at all. You only think I skipped a step because you are going to then fill that step with <insert generic deity here>.

Sometimes, though a hole is just a hole....

I know how these threads of yours go. Any chance you could do cheerfully proclaim it's all because of <insert generic deity here> sooner rather than later, and we can all pack up and move onto something else?

[TranceNRG]

I didn't skip a step at all. You only think I skipped a step because you are going to then fill that step with <insert generic deity here>.

Sometimes, though a hole is just a hole....

I know how these threads of yours go. Any chance you could do cheerfully proclaim it's all because of <insert generic deity here> sooner rather than later, and we can all pack up and move onto something else?

ok thanks for stating your opinions.

[GrokTheCube]

I don't think I understand the question, or the implications of it.

A Law simply IS, it is not created. It is fundamental to the structure of the universe. Positive and Negative attract because positive and negative attract. It's like asking what makes water wet :-)

[The_Big_E]

I don't think I understand the question, or the implications of it.

A Law simply IS, it is not created. It is fundamental to the structure of the universe. Positive and Negative attract because positive and negative attract. It's like asking what makes water wet :-)

You beat me to it...

Laws always are and always have been. They are not created we just discover and come to understand them. All the Law states is WHY something happens, it doesn't directly MAKE it happen.

[user89489489438943]

I have often read that everything occurs the way it does due to natural laws, i.e. laws of physics, laws of Chemistry, Biological laws, mathematical laws and etc.

However, I have rarely (if ever) read about the origin of these laws.

How did such precise and accurate laws that govern our world come to be?

As a religious person, I can assume the answers that religious people may give. However, I am more interested, to hear the opinions of non-religious people.

I'm curious to know what answers could be given from an atheistic point of view, aside from "chance" and "just because..."

Lastly, I hope this doesn't turn into a "I'm right and you're wrong" type of discussion. Since I honestly just want to learn about different opinions and perspectives on this issue.




Thanks

Good question.

The other day I was thinking about the purpose of everything. Not humans, not the Earth, but the universe and all the things in it. Why did it come to be (if it ever did) to begin with?! But then I was like, if there was no universe, there'd be nothingness! And it basically became a looped paradox.

AHH!!!

[mug]

My answer will be very simplistic.

Everything is as it is due to an equilibrium. Everything from the small of quantum mechanics to the largness of general relativity has to reach a point of calmness. If everything thing was destructively volitile forever nothing would exist. So given enough time forces/natural laws will fall into place and work with each peacefully to an extent.

[Jesus_2]

God wrote them of course and thats why they are perfect and eventually the sun will burn out but not before the earth follows its current path and spins into it and is destroyed. Perfection.

[squanto]

I have often read that everything occurs the way it does due to natural laws, i.e. laws of physics, laws of Chemistry, Biological laws, mathematical laws and etc.

The whole of chemistry and biology is a more simplified aspect of very complicated physics, this isn't me being facetious, a unified theory by definition would explain these disciplines as well as any other discipline known to man and separate complete and total understanding with just a large amount of calculation. This would not be the case for the unified theory of biology (evolution) or any other science. So we could focus the discussion on physics; the most accurate mathematical explanation of the natural world.

Einstein once said:

"As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain, and as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality."

However, I have rarely (if ever) read about the origin of these laws.

How did such precise and accurate laws that govern our world come to be?

As a religious person, I can assume the answers that religious people may give. However, I am more interested, to hear the opinions of non-religious people.

Religion would be an easy answer, no doubt something that has propagated for just that reason. But have our natural laws always been the same? Evidence actually points to no.

In the original Big Bang, the interactions that had taken place to result in our vast array of waves, particles and atoms are well understood. This is referred to as the study of nucleosynthesis and here is a good diagram of some of the earliest happenings in our universe:



There are currently 4 labs in the world right now currently evaluating the ratios of various isotope ratios in our universe. One ratio that has consistently given rise to controversy among the results was the Li-6/Li-7 data.



Shaded bars indicate observed ratios, while the curved lines indicate theoretical data. As you can see, there is a very large disagreement between theory and observation with lithium and deuterium.

Cosmologists have identified this as a potential sign of the young universe being subject to "different physics" beyond our current models. This is what researchers are currently working on in this aspect of cosmology.

This would indicate that our natural laws are in a small but continuous flux, or subsets of a greater emerging paradigm depending on what way you look at it.

[SYRIANKID]

I deal with a lot of these interesting "unsolved" mysteries of science all the time. Consider fluid turbulence, something we deal with on a daily basis:

Still, the complete description of turbulence remains one of the unsolved problems in physics. According to an apocryphal story Werner Heisenberg was asked what he would ask God, given the opportunity. His reply was: "When I meet God, I am going to ask him two questions: Why relativity? And why turbulence? I really believe he will have an answer for the first."[2] A similar witticism has been attributed to Horace Lamb (who had published a noted text book on Hydrodynamics) his choice being quantum mechanics (instead of relativity) and turbulence. Lamb was quoted as saying in a speech to the British Association for the Advancement of Science, "I am an old man now, and when I die and go to heaven there are two matters on which I hope for enlightenment. One is quantum electrodynamics, and the other is the turbulent motion of fluids. And about the former I am rather optimistic."[3]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turbulence

On a related note, many books have been written about the interesting phenomena of "magic numbers" in science. (Consider magic numbers in nucleus stability) Certain natural laws seem to fit very well with each other and with surprisingly recurring numbers.

[TranceNRG]

I don't think I understand the question, or the implications of it.

A Law simply IS, it is not created. It is fundamental to the structure of the universe. Positive and Negative attract because positive and negative attract. It's like asking what makes water wet :-)

Right.
That's exactly what I'm asking.
When and how did these laws come to be?
How can a law just be?


The universe itself came to be starting with the big bang, correct?

[TranceNRG]

You beat me to it...

Laws always are and always have been. They are not created we just discover and come to understand them. All the Law states is WHY something happens, it doesn't directly MAKE it happen.

DO you see the similarities between your definition of law and religious person's definition and view of God?

[TranceNRG]

My answer will be very simplistic.

Everything is as it is due to an equilibrium. Everything from the small of quantum mechanics to the largness of general relativity has to reach a point of calmness. If everything thing was destructively volitile forever nothing would exist. So given enough time forces/natural laws will fall into place and work with each peacefully to an extent.

Right...
But why does it have to be that way?

What you're saying is that the law of equilibrium precedes all other laws.

So, I ask, when and how did the law of equilibrium come to be?

[StartTheMachine]

There are theories that there are innumerable universes in different dimensions other than our own and that those different dimensions operate under completely different laws. That doesn't answer the question, since even with the multiverse theory you can still ask the same question- but that's something being speculated just the same.

It answers why our universe has the universal constants it does, if you take it a step further.

BB = Big Bang?

But for Big Bang to occur, there must have been laws already in place, ...
Right?

It has been said that if the numbers were off by just a few milliseconds, the universe would've collapsed.

Law(s) may or may not have been in place, but you're talking about such small time (far less than thousandths of a second), such enormous density and heat, that these laws break down.

And you don't know the universe didn't collapse 10^100 times before we got this one.

On a related note, many books have been written about the interesting phenomena of "magic numbers" in science. (Consider magic numbers in nucleus stability) Certain natural laws seem to fit very well with each other and with surprisingly recurring numbers.

For some, this points to a Creator. For others, it points to the T.O.E.

[TranceNRG]

The whole of chemistry and biology is a more simplified aspect of very complicated physics, this isn't me being facetious, a unified theory by definition would explain these disciplines as well as any other discipline known to man and separate complete and total understanding with just a large amount of calculation. This would not be the case for the unified theory of biology (evolution) or any other science. So we could focus the discussion on physics; the most accurate mathematical explanation of the natural world.

Einstein once said:

"As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain, and as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality."

Right.
Everything can reduced to physical laws.

Religion would be an easy answer, no doubt something that has propagated for just that reason. But have our natural laws always been the same? Evidence actually points to no.

In the original Big Bang, the interactions that had taken place to result in our vast array of waves, particles and atoms are well understood. This is referred to as the study of nucleosynthesis and here is a good diagram of some of the earliest happenings in our universe:



There are currently 4 labs in the world right now currently evaluating the ratios of various isotope ratios in our universe. One ratio that has consistently given rise to controversy among the results was the Li-6/Li-7 data.



Shaded bars indicate observed ratios, while the curved lines indicate theoretical data. As you can see, there is a very large disagreement between theory and observation with lithium and deuterium.

Cosmologists have identified this as a potential sign of the young universe being subject to "different physics" beyond our current models. This is what researchers are currently working on in this aspect of cosmology.

This would indicate that our natural laws are in a small but continuous flux, or subsets of a greater emerging paradigm depending on what way you look at it.

That is VERY interesting.
Thanks for bringing it up.


Nonetheless, whether the laws are changing (or have changed), would still imply that laws existed since the beginning of the universe (since big bang).

Could this change itself be part of a law? Like the our metabolism switching to different energy sources depending on the length of the exercise/activity.

[TranceNRG]

Law(s) may or may not have been in place, but you're talking about such small time (far less than thousandths of a second), such enormous density and heat, that these laws break down.

How could such density break down these laws?
In other words, how could tangible, substantial entities break down immaterial, intangible laws?

And you don't know the universe didn't collapse 10^100 times before we got this one.

Right.

[QuicksandATL]

God.