The laws of physics do not exist, a theoretical
physicist named Sankar Das Sarma argues in a new column published by New
Scientist. While we define the laws as the “ultimate laws” of our universe,
Sarma says they are merely working descriptions, and that they are nothing more
than mathematical equations that match with parts of nature.
The column is part of a special newsletter that New
Scientist runs each month, offering insight from top professionals within
different fields. This particular column is interesting for a number of
reasons, not to mention the fact that a theoretical physicist, somehow who
literally studies the physics of our universe for a living, is arguing against
our most basic laws of physics.
While many scientists believe in these laws as the
most absolute and ultimate laws of our universe, Sarma says he believes they do
not exist, and that without viewing them as absolutes, the study of physics is
actually much better off. But how exactly do you approach something like this?
How do you prove that the laws of physics don’t actually exist?
Well, according to Sarma, the laws of physics as we
view them are just mathematical equations, we have created to help define
certain parts of nature. After all, the reason that we call it theoretical
physics, is because it’s all based on theory and equations. As we strive to
prove that these laws exist, really all we’re doing is unraveling more detail
about how the universe works.
Think of it like this, we already have what we
believe to be a good and reasonable idea of how our universe works, how
galaxies form, how stars die, etc. But, as we study more of the early universe
and dying stars with powerful equipment like the James Webb space telescope,
we’re slowly unlocking more about those parts of our universe.
As such, Sarma says it is better to view the laws of
physics as if they are layers of an onion. As we learn more about the physics
of our universe, we’re slowly peeling away more layers, but those layers are
infinite. There is always more to peel, and thus, there is always more for us
to learn about how our universe works.
It’s an intriguing proposition and one that you
might not expect to come from someone like Sarma, who has dedicated his work to
studying how our universe works. But, if he is correct, and scientists begin to
view these laws of physics more like layers than absolute rules, we could find
new ways to learn about our universe in the end.
0 Comments