Peter Atkins - Where Do the Laws of Nature Come From?

What's real? What's fundamental? There are regularities in nature, things that are or work the same—always, everywhere, across the universe just like across your kitchen. Down deep, what are the laws of nature? What makes them laws? What is their origin? Did they come into existence or did they always exist?



Peter William Atkins (born 10 August 1940) is a British chemist and former Professor of Chemistry at the University of Oxford and a Fellow of Lincoln College. He is a prolific writer of popular chemistry textbooks.


Closer to Truth, hosted by Robert Lawrence Kuhn and directed by Peter Getzels, presents the world’s greatest thinkers exploring humanity’s deepest questions. Discover fundamental issues of existence. Engage new and diverse ways of thinking. Appreciate intense debates. Share your own opinions. Seek your own answers.

[aarrvindmbd]

Someone ignorant said to me "accept that it is the way it is you can never know enough there is a limit "
It sound striking to me wherever it is coming from its working fine.

[peweegangloku]

What we call laws in nature are human's crude descriptions of the behavior of observed fundamental forces. A much deeper question is why do these forces behave the way they do? For example, why do electrons repel each other? Why don't they just lay side by side with no repulsion or attraction? Why do they spin or vibrate? What is the source of that? Why are they not just dormant? Of course this applies to everything in the quantum field - why do they behave the way they do? If we can get to the bottom of these fundamental questions, we probably will get to know why and how the law.

[mobiustrip]

Time to scroll through the comments section to read all the experts explaining it better

[SrikanthIyerTheMariner]

Why do we think laws for nature have to COME from somewhere? .. the laws of Nature is Nature ... it simply is

[mathematicalmuscleman]

And Physical Chemistry is a Major Physical Science and Mathematical Science.

[jamesruscheinski]

Could something determine mathematics of physical laws, like maybe interaction of time and energy in quantum wave function? Such that change of physical laws of nature would require a different interaction of time and energy in quantum wave function? What could effect interaction of time and energy in quantum wave function, if that were the case?

[perishadaimari]

I've had enough studying Peter Atkin's physical chemistry book...and here YouTube recommending his interviews in my break

[grideffect]

Do fundamental constants i.e light speed or any of the fundamental constant varies over time? Hmm...If it does what does that mean for predictions? I wonder if there is data from past measurement to support this question? Thank you for asking this question Closer To Truth 🤔

[-by-_Publishing_LLC]

(1:45) *PA: **_"My view is that a scientific law is just a summary of observation."_* ... It is true that you can extrapolate laws through observing nature, but that doesn't reveal the _origin_ of these laws or why they exist in the first place. Natural laws form the backbone of existence. Laws are what determine whether we end up with an organized, finely tuned, continuously evolving universe or a 93-billion-light-years-wide arena of rampant chaos. But the question remains whether these laws were axiomatically present from the beginning ... or emerged right along with everything else at T=0.

The truth is that all natural laws can be reduced to logic (mathematics). Logic and mathematics are irreducible and axiomatic. There is no more organized, repeatable, reliable, or efficient structure than *logic* for which no preexisting substrate is required. This is why mathematics is so prevalent in nature.

(4:50) *PA: **_"The second law [thermodynamics] emerged from observations on steam engines and thinking about how to improve their efficiency."_* ... Humans seek efficiency because efficiency is logical. The best reference material one can use for achieving efficiency is to mimic the laws of nature (which were spawned from mathematics).

*Aside:* In my book I offer the *"5 Laws of Existence"* which are also structured via logic. These five falsifiable laws regulate what can or cannot exist, and equally determine the fate of everything in existence ... _even "Existence, " itself!_

[JoeSmith-vssy]

Expanding Universe implies a starting point. At some as yet undetermined point the limit will have been reached and a collapse back to the single point will begin. In Eastern religious terms this is called the Breath of Brahma.

[rajendratayya]

Laws of nature define the limitations to our human behaviour. But nature originally is spontaneous though equable for life to be possible.

[oskarngo]

Laws of nature don’t come from anywhere...!

It’s just our description of how nature works...

[pinaky_AnVikSiki]

Observation of timelapse of nature behaviour so time defines the laws which change envloping manner...

[EristiCat]

Do the laws derive from reality, i.e., what is. is, and studying it allows you to derive laws which describe how reality operates? Or does reality derive from the laws, i.e. the underlying "what is" is the laws, not the reality. Intuitively to me, reality precedes laws. If laws appear to change it would be because the reality from which the laws flowed from changed. The discussion on the video seems to proceed from the notion that the laws are the primary thing, which seems wrong to me. It's similar to the math question, does 2+2=4 because the "laws of math" say so or because two things which meld with two things wind up as four things?

[TheLuminousOne]

Logical Laws of Nature have to be conceived. What drives reality and evolution?

[young]

From the comments, I can see that there are several people who watched this video whom he should have asked.

[Random-Spritualily]

Where Do the Laws of Nature Come From?
Let's say that they came from "HERE".
Now, the next immediate question is, "Where does that "HERE" come from?".

[junevandermark]

The laws of nature are survival of the fittest, in that life forms that are not up to the battle, lose and become extinct.

Laws that apply to mythical religion, is that a god exists that never loses, as "his" plan was set up by him to win every battle.

[alanschaub]

Rupert Sheldrake does not get enough credit for his theory that the laws of nature might be merely habits.

[tomkwake]

If science predicts the Laws and Constants of nature were in existence at the Big Bang to get the form of our universe we observe today. Then the Laws of nature need to be re-created in the moment of 'now', not like once in existence, there is no energy involved in maintaining the Laws and constants in nature. For example, the accelerating expansion of the volume of the universe and the cosmological constant. Where is the energy coming from to maintain the cosmological constant and the expansion in this moment of 'now'?