I think this question is based on a misunderstanding of what law means in science.
The laws of nature are not like the laws of human society: rules written by someone, ideally approved by majority consensus (except in dictatorships), and imposed on society with penalties for violating them.
The laws of nature are not rules to be followed; they are scientists’ descriptions of how nature predictably behaves, usually expressed in mathematical formulae (like the ideal gas laws and Newton’s law of universal gravitation [below]) or concise verbal statements (like the law of independent assortment and the law of complementary base pairing in genetics).
Above: Newton’s law expressed mathematically
The laws of nature can’t be broken; That is, if we observe something contrary to a law of nature, it’s not because nature violated a rule that was set down for it; it’s because the law that scientists formulated was imperfect and failed to account for certain situations or things that were unknown to science at the time of its formulation, or simply that the law allows for minor exceptions. In biology, to take another example, the law of complementary base pairing says that in DNA, adenine “always” pairs with thymine, but we all know that there are occasional “mistakes” or exceptions, flaws in a DNA molecule, like an A–G pair. Stating a law of nature simply means “This is the way we see things behaving as a rule; this is the norm.” But that implicit “as a rule” understanding does allow for infrequent exceptions and variations.
The laws of society are inventions; the laws of nature are discoveries. Laws do not govern the universe; they describe it. Or as this Wikipedia writer puts it well:
Scientific laws or laws of science are statements, based on repeated experiments or observations, that describe or predict a range of natural phenomena. The term law has diverse usage in many cases (approximate, accurate, broad, or narrow) across all fields of natural science (physics, chemistry, biology, Earth science). Laws are developed from data and can be further developed through mathematics; in all cases they are directly or indirectly based on empirical evidence. It is generally understood that they implicitly reflect, though they do not explicitly assert, causal relationships fundamental to reality, and are discovered rather than invented.
The nature of scientific laws has been much discussed in philosophy, but in essence scientific laws are simply empirical conclusions reached by scientific method; they are intended to be neither laden with ontological commitments nor statements of logical absolutes.
To rephrase the question based on a correct understanding of natural law, it should not ask “Which is the most used physics law that is likely to be broken in the near future?,” but rather, “To what widely accepted law of physics are scientists most likely to find exceptions in the near future?” That would be like asking, what are some foreseeable examples similar to the observations that conflict with Newton’s law of universal gravitation?
To that, I offer no answer.
For possible further edification, I also offer this excerpt from my textbook, a very short discussion of the meanings of fact, law, and theory in science, to the limited extent that I have space for in an undergraduate textbook of anatomy and physiology. (A significant minority of instructors think I shouldn’t even include this much, deeming it irrelevant to A&P students. Obviously I disagree.)
Content created and supplied by: LionKing_Simba (via Opera News )
Opera News is a free to use platform and the views and opinions expressed herein are solely those of the author and do not represent, reflect or express the views of Opera News. Any/all written content and images displayed are provided by the blogger/author, appear herein as submitted by the blogger/author and are unedited by Opera News. Opera News does not consent to nor does it condone the posting of any content that violates the rights (including the copyrights) of any third party, nor content that may malign, inter alia, any religion, ethnic group, organization, gender, company, or individual. Opera News furthermore does not condone the use of our platform for the purposes encouraging/endorsing hate speech, violation of human rights and/or utterances of a defamatory nature. If the content contained herein violates any of your rights, including those of copyright, and/or violates any the above mentioned factors, you are requested to immediately notify us using via the following email address operanews-external(at)opera.com and/or report the article using the available reporting functionality built into our Platform See More