Tell me more ×
Physics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for active researchers, academics and students of physics. It's 100% free, no registration required.
up vote 0 down vote favorite

Can induction be justified in physics? Just because the laws of physics has held so far doesn't necessarily mean it will continue to do so tomorrow.

There is the example of the chicken in the farm. Everyday, it is fed food by the farmer, and so, it comes to the conclusion it will always be fed everyday. But then, one day, it is led to the slaughterhouse.

What reason do we have to believe the laws of physics will continue to hold tomorrow?

I mean, what if we're in a computer simulation, and it has been running for a long time, but tomorrow, they decide to turn off the simulation, and poof, off we go.

share|improve this question
5  
Hume covered this in the 1700s. Fundamentally, there is no reason. It is an axiom. It has worked out pretty well in the past. There is no fundamental reason to expect this to work out in the future, other than there is no real alternative. – Jerry Schirmer Oct 9 '11 at 15:04
1  
This could be placed at philosophy.se – Georg Oct 9 '11 at 15:21
1  
anyway physics or any natural science for that matter are purely deductive from the observations and then inferring from them. So, if one fine day the observations themselves cease to exist, the very basis of the laws will be invalidated. – Vineet Menon Oct 9 '11 at 16:08

closed as off topic by Colin K, Georg, David Zaslavsky♦ Oct 9 '11 at 18:50

Questions on Physics Stack Exchange are expected to relate to physics within the scope defined in the FAQ. Consider editing the question or leaving comments for improvement if you believe the question can be reworded to fit within the scope. Read more about closed questions here.

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.