首页> 外文期刊>New scientist >Natural laws, or not
【24h】

Natural laws, or not

机译:自然法则与否

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

Just how much does the world follow laws? The human mind, it seems, may not be the ideal toolkit with which to craft an answer. To understand the world at all, we have to predict likely events and so we have a lot invested in spotting rules, even when they are not really there. Such demands have also shaped more specialised parts of culture. The history of the sciences is one of constant struggle between the accumulation of observations and their abstraction into natural laws. The temptation (especially for physicists) is to assume these laws are real: a bedrock underpinning the messy, observable world. Life scientists, on the other hand, can afford no such assumption. Their field is constantly on the move, a plaything of time and historical contingency. If there is a lawfulness to living things, few plants and animals seem to be aware of it.
机译:世界到底有多少遵守法律?看来,人的思维可能不是用来制定答案的理想工具包。要完全了解世界,我们必须预测可能发生的事件,因此,即使在规则没有真正出现的情况下,我们也投入了大量资金。这样的需求也塑造了文化的更加特殊的部分。科学的历史是在观测的积累和将其抽象为自然定律之间不断的斗争之一。诱惑(特别是对于物理学家而言)是要假设这些定律是真实的:支撑凌乱,可观察世界的基石。另一方面,生命科学家无法承担这样的假设。他们的领域不断变化,充满时间和历史偶然性。如果生物合法,那么几乎没有动植物会意识到这一点。

著录项

  • 来源
    《New scientist》 |2016年第3095期|44-45|共2页
  • 作者

    Simon Ings;

  • 作者单位
  • 收录信息 美国《科学引文索引》(SCI);美国《化学文摘》(CA);
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

  • 入库时间 2022-08-18 02:51:31

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号