On 08/17/2013 07:53 AM, J. Clarke wrote:
[snip]
No, physicists when they find that the law doesn't hold, want to know
why and under what circumstances and when the figure that out then they
modify "the law" accordingly.

Can you give us some examples of "the law not holding" that are regarded
as "well understood and physically unimportant" that don't involve your
own misunderstanding of simplified models used for computational
convenience?

Here are a few examples of what some scientists think of as a law that a
phenomenon is impossible, violates the laws of physics, etc. Yet they
happen. They think they are well understood by claiming they do not
happen and are done by fraud. And they say they are unimportant physically.

Mental Telepathy.
Clairvoyance (also known as remote viewing).
Some other phenomena called "psychic."

Yet when controlled experiments are done, the odds that they are due to
chance are much much much lower than what is required to get drugs
approved by the FDA.

http://www.amazon.com/Conscious-Univ...rds=Dean+Radin

There are wise physicists who recognize that these phenomena surely
exist. Where there is disagreement is related to what is the actual
physical mechanism that supports these phenomena.