Kim Jones-2 wrote:
> Is it possible to have a universe with no laws, including the laws of
> physics? Is not having any laws of physics possible? What could happen
> within such a universe? It seems at least a logical possibility (to me).
> Wouldn't this be equivalent to saying either:
> 1. The laws of physics can't be divined or derived in those universes for
> some reason so we only think there no laws
> 2. The laws of physics change continually in those universes so we can't
> measure them
> 3. Nothing is possible at all in those universes, but the universes
> nevertheless exist in some sense.
> Is this just an empty set or is there more to it?
I don't see any evidence that the/any universe follows laws. Laws just
approximate behaviour, they are not what determines behaviour.
Self-organization causes laws, not the opposite way.

We see that in the history of physics. All "laws" turned out to be
approximations and not perfectly accurate. I don't see why this should
change, so sooner or later all laws will turn out to be approximations of a
another law, or a "principle" that is not a law (self-organization).
Especially considering quantum mechanics we have to be very bold to state
that the universe follows laws. What we actually see is that laws *don't*
determine the behaviour, since quantum mechanical equations don't describe a
certain behaviour. We don't even have quantum mechanical laws, we have just
a way to make statistical predictions. What kind of law would it be that you
are allow to smoke weed 50% of the time? That wouldn't really be a law.
One might argue that there is an objective wavefunction that follows quantum
mechanical laws, but that is only an assumption, we can't actually find such
a thing (it seems we can't even define a universal wavefunction for the
universe) , so it is just dogmatic to insist is has to exist.
One might also argue that it is a law in so far that it predicts all the
order that there is (meaning what possibility happens of the described ones
is totally random), but this has yet to be shown. We know from experiments
that there is a certain distribution that can be quite accurately defined,
but not that it is entirely random in which way the distribution is achieved
(there may be other distributions which are only locally valid and which
cancel out on average).

More realistic is the possibility that physical laws are only relative and
approximate laws, that can sometimes be violated (like in paranormal
events), just like laws in justice. The laws are only a kind of approximate
common denominator of behaviour. I even think small violations are a vital
part of the functioning of the universe (especially in more intelligent
beings) - the more intelligent, the more laws can be violated without going
into a state of confusion (leading to decreased fitness and thus death).

We already have a lot of evidence that human intelligence can transcend
physical laws, it just isn't yet overwhelming enough to convince the hard
headed materialistic scientific majority. But this will change in a not so
far future, I am pretty sure of that.
It isn't so easy to show that the laws don't universally apply, because it
is very hard to verify. Up to a certain point, we can always say "maybe the
laws work together in a way we don't yet understand" (even though that gets
increasingly implausible), since the laws are so damn complex.

View this message in context:
Sent from the Everything List mailing list archive at

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
For more options, visit this group at

Reply via email to