Law, Past, Future

Hume analyzes an Empirical Law 'A causes B' as 'Previously, A and B have observed to be constantly conjoined, a pattern that is projected to continue in future cases'.  Now, it is usually considered that the primary target of his Skepticism is the inference from a Constant Conjunction to some more unitary connection.  But, its more significant, more general, undermining is of the undemonstrable assumption that the Future repeats the Past.  Thus, even granting that hitherto, God has not played dice with the universe, the conclusion that that will not change is completely groundless.  Likewise, no number of demonstrations that the Speed of Light has been constant is equivalent to the thesis that it will continue to be so.  The focus on the first clause of Hume's analysis has contributed to the interpretation of it as of narrow Epistemological import.  In contrast, the second entertains the possibility that the world may some day be entirely different than it has been, i. e. that it has been correctly interpreted, but it has since changed, e. g. if the Earth suddenly reverses the direction of its spin, Copernicus will be proven not wrong, just temporarily correct.