The entire Universe, including each one of us and each molecule and atom in our bodies, functions after a set of laws. Those laws can’t be altered or broken by anyone, regardless of how wealthy, smart, pretty, or mama’s pearl someone might be. Those laws are also known as the laws of physics or laws of nature.
Surely any scientist has wondered why the laws of physics are always so constant. How did those laws emerge in the first place? While the Big Bang is the generally accepted theory among physicists for the birth of matter, space, and time, there’s no scientific explanation yet for how the laws of physics began to exist. Common sense tells us that everything must have a beginning and an end. Since even time and space themselves haven’t been around forever, a similar principle should also apply to the laws of physics. But perhaps human understanding has its limits, unfortunately.
Another possibility is that scientists have been thinking about the laws of physics in the wrong way. Perhaps these laws are nothing but manmade concepts to try to explain how nature works. That’s somewhat what a physicist proposes now.
Is the world like peeling an “infinite onion”?
Sankar Das Sarma, a theoretical physicist, is a scientist who isn’t convinced about the existence of the laws of physics. In fact, he even denies that those laws exist. He writes in NewScientist, as Futurism quotes:
What we often call laws of physics are really just consistent mathematical theories that seem to match some parts of nature.
The physicist also said, as the latter source also quotes:
Here’s the thing,
Despite many scientists viewing their role as uncovering these ultimate laws, I just don’t believe they exist.
Das Sarma seems to have a pretty nihilistic view of life and nature, with no disrespect intended toward the physicist. Here’s another interesting quote from him that seems to consolidate his skepticism and even his nihilistic view, as Futurism also quotes:
As we discover more about nature, we can hone our descriptions of it, but it is never-ending,
Like peeling an infinite onion, the more we peel, the more there is to peel.
How about a Multiverse?
There are lots of scientific theories about the so-called Multiverse. Just as its name suggests, a Multiverse describes nature as consisting of much more than just the single Universe where we all live. Instead, there might be numerous other universes besides our own. The idea of a Multiverse is not new at all, and it’s not just a good scenario for sci-fi movies. One of the theories regarding the Multiverse claims that each and every one of us might have copies of ourselves in other universes. Each of those variants of us represents the outcome of different series of decisions that those individuals took in their lives. There is some scientific fundament to the Multiverse, although skeptics will always argue that there are only theories, not facts.
Sankar Das Sarma seems to be a fan of Multiverse theories as well. He adds that even quantum mechanics pose a lot of unanswered questions. Therefore, the theory cannot be considered sacrosanct, the physicist believes. Sarma even thinks that a thousand years from now, quantum mechanics will almost surely be replaced with something else to describe nature at a fundamental level.
Interestingly enough, the physicist still manifests appreciation for the fact that humanity has found ways of making sense of some aspects of nature due to the laws of physics.
What’s for sure, if you ask us, is that scientists still have a lot more to learn about how nature works, and it’s the mystery itself that keeps the quest so exciting!
