What came first the universe or the laws that govern it?

[asanewt]

and what was the point of laws when there was no one around to understand them , ( in the beginning.)

[dettom]

the laws governing it its not a matter of understanding the laws it is physics

[Destrii]

Laws (of physics) don't have to have anyone to understand them in order to exist. For instance, you could argue that what's the point of, say, radioactivity, when only the dinosaurs existed because they couldn't understand particle theory? But it's still there.

I suppose what we call "laws" are really only "truths", which are always correct and always apply in our universe. The word law indicates that you can disobey it, but are not allowed to. With a law of physics, it is not a question of "may", but "are able to".

So, in conclusion, the laws which govern the universe were created at the same time; one did not cause the other. Perhaps they are, to a certain extent, the same thing? Besides, is this philosophy or physics? Do I need to get out more? These questions may never be answered.

[trprat]

Both happened at the same instant. Laws are not for individuals. Wouldn't it sound stupid if laws were made only for those who can understand them? Everything in the Universe (except perhaps, man) understand and obey laws. (Men are more keen on breaking them).

[Sauwelios]

The universe and the "laws" (necessities) that govern it are inseparable. Those "laws" are formulations of how the universe works. But the universe is not the subject and the "working" its activity; the universe *is* the working -- it is a *process*.

As to your second question: the so-called "laws" of the universe are not laws in the legal sense, which can be broken or adhered to. The "laws" of the universe can't be broken: they are *necessities*.

[Old guy]

co-arising and co-dependant.

Conscious intent moves potential to matter, mater to life, life to consciousness, consciousness to consciousness.