I'm inclined to say that since the state change itself involves an energy transfer that nothing would happen -- but I'm not sure either. I am confident though (yes, I know that my confidence proves nothing) that if you did the identical experiment under the identical conditions in a hundred different laboratories you would get identical results. If you did get variations, you would look for (and probably find) variables you hadn’t eliminated, including (as you point out) imprecision in your instruments. You would not conclude that water has variable properties. Now consider your sample assertion: “In modern democratic capitalist societies, minimum wage laws as typically drafted and enforced generate more benefit than harm to low-skilled workers.” What do “modern,” “democratic,” “capitalist,” “typically,” “benefit,” “harm,” and “low-skilled” mean? All of these terms are subject to endless interpretation. I am not saying that we should throw our hands up and give up on public policy altogether, but I am saying when people discuss such matters they are rarely, if ever, on the same page.
I have read your article again and am substantially in agreement. The Voltaire quote is great, too. But I feel that saying political issues are more complex than scientific issues and therefore people disagree about politics is too ... simple. There are plenty of scientific issues of deep complexity. Typical people who are willing to argue about nationalized health insurance despite a lack of expertise will not argue about protein folding, regardless of the complexity. Huemer argues that people are subject to bias when discussing politics, and they sometimes have good, rational reasons for their bias. I think this is an important factor, and one that should be included as part of the dizzying complexity that makes political questions contentious.
I agree with all of that. I picked the freezing point of water to use as an example, and not quantum theory, for a reason! Much of science is extremely complex -- but ALL of economics is. That's why laws in economics become less reliable as economists try to make them more precise. Great discussion. I hope to hear from you again.