Traditionally scientists have treated the laws of physics as simply 'given ' elegant mathematical relationships that were somehow imprinted on the universe at its birth and fixed thereafter. Inquiry into the origin and nature of the laws was not regarded as a proper part of science.
Invented languages have often been created in tandem with entire invented universes and most conlangers come to their craft by way of fantasy and science fiction.
Science fiction is becoming more of a diverse kind of genre.
I like science fiction and physics things like that. Planets being sucked into black holes and the various vortexes that create possibility and what happens on the other side of the black hole. To me it's the microcosmic study of the macrocosmic universe in man and that's why I'm attracted to it.
It is critical to develop a biofuel industry powered by feedstocks produced in every corner of the country in addition to the Midwest. That is why USDA has established five regional research centers working on science necessary to ensure profitable biofuels can be produced from a diverse range of feedstocks.
Equipped with his five senses man explores the universe around him and calls the adventure Science.
We know from science that nothing in the universe exists as an isolated or independent entity.
The most watched programme on the BBC after the news is probably 'Doctor Who.' What has happened is that science fiction has been subsumed into modern literature. There are grandparents out there who speak Klingon who are quite capable of holding down a job. No one would think twice now about a parallel universe.
Traditional science assumes for the most part that an objective observer independent reality exists the universe stars galaxies sun moon and earth would still be there if no one was looking.
Science predicts that many different kinds of universe will be spontaneously created out of nothing. It is a matter of chance which we are in.
The universe is governed by science. But science tells us that we can't solve the equations directly in the abstract.
The usual approach of science of constructing a mathematical model cannot answer the questions of why there should be a universe for the model to describe. Why does the universe go to all the bother of existing?
Every science has for its basis a system of principles as fixed and unalterable as those by which the universe is regulated and governed. Man cannot make principles he can only discover them.
If we long to believe that the stars rise and set for us that we are the reason there is a Universe does science do us a disservice in deflating our conceits?
There was no 'before' the beginning of our universe because once upon a time there was no time.
Nothing in the universe can travel at the speed of light they say forgetful of the shadow's speed.
In science 'fact' can only mean 'confirmed to such a degree that it would be perverse to withhold provisional assent.' I suppose that apples might start to rise tomorrow but the possibility does not merit equal time in physics classrooms.