John Carlos Baez on Nostr: nprofile1q…29af5 - I hope those are not 'fundamental laws' in my sense. They may ...
nprofile1qy2hwumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnddaehgu3wwp6kyqpqdzy9dsk9676sfym25fced7ew6r5fspaj9lt0eqm255dmvupemasqm29af5 (nprofile…9af5) - I hope those are not 'fundamental laws' in my sense. They may not be derivable from general relativity and the Standard Model yet, but I hope that at some point we will have a theory of gravity and a theory of particle physics from which these laws will follow 'in principle'.
Of course the word 'in principle' is tricky. For example, a fluid flowing past a cylinder develops eddies when the Reynolds number is bigger than 4 (roughly). It's hard to derive this law from the fundamental laws of atomic physics - yet nobody believes it's logically independent from those more fundamental laws. That is, we believe that if we simulate a fluid made of atoms following those more fundamental laws, it will develop eddies when the Reynolds number exceeds a value around 4.
Of course the word 'in principle' is tricky. For example, a fluid flowing past a cylinder develops eddies when the Reynolds number is bigger than 4 (roughly). It's hard to derive this law from the fundamental laws of atomic physics - yet nobody believes it's logically independent from those more fundamental laws. That is, we believe that if we simulate a fluid made of atoms following those more fundamental laws, it will develop eddies when the Reynolds number exceeds a value around 4.