Moore's [not a] Law [at all]
The "law" has changed since he wrote about it, adusting it to meet the facts, hardly a law! originally it was doubling every year, then it was doubling very two years, besides, it's a nonsense anyway, the original prediction was "the number of components per integrated circuit for minimum cost" whereas it's often been taken to mean the maximum we can cram in a chip, when some of these multi core behmouth chips come out they cost well over $1000 a unit, hardly a minimum cost!
Moore could see (historically) that there was an obvious exponential growth, he made a broadly accurate prediction that growth would continue to be exponential (he got the factor wrong, so he changed it), and of course it's still wrong, for example, in 1975 when he changed his "prediction" to doubling every two years, the 6502 had about 3.5K transistors, which means by 2006 it should have been 40M, but actually it was 1.7Bn transistors (itanium 2).
Don't get me wrong, I'm not criticising Moore, it's not his fault that he's being held up as some kind of "uncannily accurate"magical fortune teller, it's all a bit "Life of Brian", Intel (et al) like to perpetuate such things, if you want a prediction that is genuinely looking at the future then in 1950 Alan Turning said computers would have at least 128Mb of memory by the year 2000, which, considering computer programs were a novel concept, and it was the physical configuration of vacuum tubes that was generally the "program" he wasn't just extrapolating history.