Are laws of physics or any scientific theories always constant?

[DesiDani]

What I mean is did all theories or laws always exist with no beginning or origin source? They will exist everywhere, it may not apply everywhere or it is different in some places, but aren't they always a constant. A constant with no time of origin, place or origin, or source of origin?

If not, then what is that origin? How can a law or theory be created. What creates it? If it is created then how do you that the circumstances that made it up wasn't always available; the law or theory was always there but the factors that are needed to start the theory or law hasn't been there yet?
Correction:
"place or origin"
place of origin
Correction:
"then how do you that "
then how do you know that
MctchinL
That is not an answer just something that you just "had to say" thumbs down. I aksed this on SM for a reason.
Addition:
I mean the theory or law it self. Like with gravity, was it always there but it needed mass for it to be applied. Or did the gravity come after the BB.
Cutekitt:
Thumbs up and a whoa that is a lot there. You mentioned time. Another example of what I want to know is was time always around an infinite (no beginging or end), but time needed the BB to start it or begin it.

Like with my clock. The time is always there in my clock, but it needs me to wind it up and start it. Time doesn't stay still when it the clock stops. Time didn't begin when man first invented a clock or sun dial.

Or was it? Is time a "always was" or did something have to begin it.

[Bruce J]

Maybe you don't get this whole 'science' thing. Lemme break it down:

We don't know. We...simply...don't....know.

That's what is so wonderful about science. There are endless questions, just waiting to be answered. You have just as much chance to answer that question as anyone. All you have to do is apply yourself.

[Nukemann]

The laws and theories are our way of interpreting the truth about our universe, the scientific method is to make a hypothesis and then test it to see if it is valid, if it is, it may become a theory, and finally a law. The underlying truth is there and has been there, our interpretation may not be correct or complete, but that is what we strive to achieve. It may be we are not meant to attain that goal, but it is up to us to make the attempt.

[cutekittenkyti]

My college physics class just talked about this concept. So I can give you a university answer for your question, but whether you or I or someone else believes it is up to you.

To start out with I'm going to talk about forces.
Modern physics says that there are four main forces in the universe.
Strong force
Weak force
Electromagnetic force
Gravity

Now electricity and magnetism are often thought of to be different forces, but actually when viewed from a mathematical point of view (that sentence isn't quite right)
They are actually the same force.

If you have an electical field (field is what supplies the force) then you expierience a electrical force. BUT if you are moving through the electrical field, or the electrical field is moving, THEN you expierence a magnetic force.
If all depends on your point of view, or what reference frame your in.

So that's why it is the electromagnetic force not two forces

So scientists were like, hey we combined those two forces, can we combine any more?

So it turns out (in a complex mathematical way, WAY more complexed then the electromagnetic force) basically if you raise the temperature high enough, then the electromagnetic force and the weak force combine into the electro weak force.

So physics people were like 'sweet' and tried to combine the forces even more.

So basically if you raise the temperature EVEN more then you can combine the strong force with the electroweak force.

And right now people are trying to combine gravity with these forces, but haven't been able to. There is a semi promsing theory called string theory that is being made, but so far no single force has been mathematically shown

So laws and theory's are a construction made by human beings. They are constantly being reevaluated and changed. And Law's are just theory's that haven't been disproven for a LONG time.

One example is Newton's Law's of motion.
Those laws are actually wrong when the velocity's aproach the speed of light, a new theory had to be made to account for this.

So I'm saying its more the forces then the theory's being made. The theory's are changed to represent expiriments.

But to continue with the combining the forces

The forces should all (theoretically) combine at a high enough temperatures

Now this temperature only exists maybe in the inside of stars. It is probally higher actually.

But where did such a temperature exist. Or according to my profesor, when did such a temperature exist.

The answer is, of course, the big bang.
So if you draw a graph of the comparative energy level of the different forces compared to time. Draw four forces at today's time. but show them combining as you go back in time. So back at when time = 0 then there was one force.

And if your question now is, if I go back in time, will I measure a different amount of force?
The answer is no (because we know that common sense wise) but the forces aren't changing, its the mechanism that is.

There is a concept called Higgs mechanism, and that is that when a symetry breaks then a force is created.
A symetry is sort of like
Conservation of energy, its symetry is time translation invariance

(moving in time doesn't change) look up invariant in a dictionary

So people are searching for a new symetry so that all the forces can be combined

Another application of this Higgs mechanism is Higg's bosons, which people are looking for.

(I don't know too much about the symmetry or the Higg's mechanism, I just know that my proffesor briefly mentioned it in this context)

In short, the theories and laws change by humans changing them to account for the new information they find or new logic they use. But forces can be shown to mathematically combine as you raise the temperature (aka go back in time)

[mtchndjnmtch]

You need to get out more and enjoy life a little more. Nothing is constant! And that is a fact.

[photonics]

no. theories are always remains under the constant scrutiny of scientific world. as they get a new experiment that is not supported by the result of the old theory then that is replaced by a new and reasonable theory. however there are some laws that has been found to be true always but even though we can't say that they are not infallible
the phenomenon of paradigm shift is always going on . what our ancestor have thought of might be true for them but once a better mind thought that and gave its explanation in a new way this is called paradigm shift. this process will continue.

[Josh K]

I agree with you in a sense. I believe that everything is constand even time itself. Everything must have already existed. I found the big bang theory to be invalid. It hints to the possibility of absolute nothing, not even time or anything before the big bang. Nothing existed, not even space or the color dark of space. They say that in order for the big bang theory to be true is that an eternity has already occured before the big bang "happened". Huh, sure, whatever. Doesnt make sense to me.

[.02$: /]

do you think mebbe it started when somebody first decided what should be was more important than what is? i do.

[.02$: /]

do you think mebbe it started when somebody first decided what should be was more important than what is? i do.