In this paper I discuss two features of laws in physics and ask to what extent these features are compatible with different philosophical accounts of laws of nature. These features are (i) that laws in physics fit what Richard Feynman has dubbed the "Babylonian conception" of physics, according to which laws in physics form an interlocking set of ‘theorems’; and (ii) that the distinction between dynamics and kinematics is to some extent contextual. These features, I argue, put pressure on any philosophical account of laws that presupposes that the laws of physics have a unique quasi-axiomatic structure, such as the Mill-Ramsey-Lewis account of laws and metaphysical accounts of laws that assume that there is a privileged explanatory nomological hierarchy
