>>7626770Not really. Sure, they're based on assumptions, but those assumptions are so deeply fundamental - and have remained so solidly consistent for hundreds of years without counterexample - that I would be terribly surprised if they proved not to be fundamental.
For instance, mass-energy conservation is rooted directly in time invariance symmetry - the idea that the laws of physics don't depend on what time it is.
And momentum conservation symmetry is equivalent to translational symmetry - the idea that the laws of physics don't change if you shift the lab three feet to the left.
Furthermore, energy conservation has proved so successful over centuries that its only modifications have been to reveal still deeper symmetries.
