0
$\begingroup$

In quantum mechanic, we have many different postulates.

In classic mechanic, we have different laws.

As long as I know that physics's laws are temporarily correct until an anomaly. But what is the RIGOROUS difference between a "Postulate" versus a "Law"? It seems the same for me.

$\endgroup$
0
$\begingroup$

A Scientific Law is a statement that describes a phenomenon, and is backed up by repeated experimental evidence. They are developed from data.

A postulate is a statement made before a theoretical approach is outlined. The idea behind a postulate is that if it were the case that the postulate were not true, then the following theory would be invalidated.

In other words, a postulate is assumed to be true, and if it is not true in a given circumstance, then the theory that falls from it no longer works, while a Law is rigorously tested.

$\endgroup$
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ ... though it bears emphasizing that laws need not have universal validity. A simple example is Ohm's Law - a bunch of circuit elements follow it, and a bunch don't, but that doesn't detract from its status as a law. $\endgroup$ – Emilio Pisanty May 14 at 7:19

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.