An exploration of the connections between law, science, and truth, this paper argues that ‘truth’ is an evolving, rather than fixed, concept. It is a human creation, and the processes, or standards, by which it has been evaluated have changed over time. Currently knowledge production is anchored in the natural sciences but reproduced and validated by philosophical rationalisation. There are two problems with this technique of knowledge verification (or ‘veridiction’). First, the natural sciences are not, in fact, practiced according to their ideal forms; and second, the Queen of Sciences, physics, underwent two fundamental paradigm shifts in the early nineteenth century. General relativity and quantum theory entered the scene, sending ripples throughout science, and the social sciences. These changes too have been slowly absorbed by philosophy, giving rise in part to the postmodernist and deconstructivist movements. I chart this gradual evolution of truth and knowledge production in physics and in law and analyse the resistance it has faced from both classical law and classical physics. Finally I argue that this resistance could be overcome, if legal theory, and especially legal positivism, would embrace a more accurate and up-to-date understanding of the science it purports to examine and emulate.

在探索法律，科学与真理之间的联系时，本文认为“真相”是一个不断发展的概念，而不是固定的概念。它是人类的创造，并且对其进行评估的过程或标准已经随着时间而改变。目前，知识的产生是基于自然科学的，但是是通过哲学合理化进行再现和验证的。这种知识验证（或“验证”）技术存在两个问题。首先，实际上，自然科学并不是按照理想的形式来实践的；第二，科学女王，物理学在19世纪初期经历了两个基本的范式转换。广义相对论和量子理论进入了现场，在整个科学和社会科学领域引起了涟漪。这些变化也已被哲学慢慢吸收，在某种程度上引起了后现代主义和解构主义运动。我绘制了物理学和法律领域真理与知识产生的这种逐渐演变，并分析了它在古典法和古典物理学中所面临的阻力。最后，我认为，如果法律理论，尤其是法律实证主义能够对它声称要研究和模仿的科学有更准确和最新的理解，则可以克服这种阻力。