Scientists Question Laws of Nature

mknewman writes "MSNBC is reporting that scientists are finding differences in many of the current scientific 'constants' including the speed of light, alpha (the fine structure constant of the magnetic force), the ratio of proton to electron mass and several others. These findings were made by observing quasars and comparing the results to tests here on the earth." From the article: "Time-varying constants of nature violate Einstein's equivalence principle, which says that any experiment testing nuclear or electromagnetic forces should give the same result no matter where or when it is performed. If this principle is broken, then two objects dropped in a gravitational field should fall at slightly different rates. Moreover, Einstein's gravitational theory -- general relativity -- would no longer be completely correct, Martins says."

Speed of Light

[MECC]

FTA:the quasar observations are sometimes interpreted as indicating that light was faster in the past,

They just don't make photons like they use to...

*leaps through the doorway*

[Anonymous Coward]

No one expects the Science Inquisition!

*runs back out the door*

I declare a "War on Quasars" ...

[supersnail]

filthy law breaking unearthly quasars should be hunted down and expelled from the galaxy.

Dharma Initiative

[OctoberSky]

For those wondering who "scientists" are, it's the Dharma crew.

I would recommend not flying/sailing for the next few months.

honestly...

[Digitus1337]

It doesn't take an Einstein to... aww crap.

Damn yung'uns

[BlackCobra43]

In my days we had to wait for the light to travel 1,000,000 miles in the snow, uphill, both ways, to measure it - and we LIKED it.

"Scientists Question Laws of Nature"

[KIFulgore]

Well.... yeah. That's their jeorb.

Re:Interesting Things Happen At Excessive Scales

[truthsearch]

Hmm... nope. Still boring. ;)

Star Trek TNG for real?

[imaginaryelf]

Q: "Easy: Change the gravitational constant of the universe."

Geordi: "What?"

Q: "Change the gravitational constant of the universe, thereby altering the asteroid's orbit."

Geordi: "How do you do that?"

Q: "You just DO it, that's all..."

Data: "What Geordi is saying is that we do not have the ability to change the gravitational constant of the universe."

Q: "Well, then, you obviously never read slashdot."

Re:12 Billion Year Old Light & the Expanding U

[Tackhead]

> Yes, I think that there is call for speculation on the constants varying over billions of years ...

Yet more evidence that the universe is just a gigantic computer simulation.

Old programmer's adage: Variables won't. Constants aren't.

Never close doors...

[electrosoccertux]

Even the ones you think lead to a gaping abyss. You never know when there'll be an ore field on the way.

I'm tired of hearing people tell my friend from Georgia Tech that he can't develope a free energy device. The quantum model is far from perfect. It is entirely possible we could extract the [theories, now] ZPE (our gravitational like-force experienced in the casimir-effect) from empty space. Who are these people to comdemn him? How many of them went to Georgia Tech? Do they have the schematics and plans for a device for free energy? No. How would they know anything about it? Are they willing to fund him so he can build his? Even though that might prove them right, they're too busy running after their quantum smoke. They're no better than the Catholic Church railing on Galileo.

Sod's Law?

[owlnation]

I'm guessing that we can still count on Murphy's Law?

Re:Physical laws are not "wrong"

[McBainLives]

No physical law is ever completely correct. A physical law is simply a description of reality to the degree to which we understand it, and is "correct" (i.e. produces predicitions which fit our measurements) within the realm of our present experience of the phenomenon it describes. As our understanding and experience of a phenomenon grows to encompass a wider range of circumstances (e.g. scale, velocity), the law needs to be either refined or replaced with new law, possibly based upon a new paradigm.

Wow- that's how legal laws work too. Just substitute "campaign contributions" for "wider range of circumstances" and you'll see it. Spooky...

(Yes, I'm a lawyer. I'll prove it: any of y'all responding to this post (hereafter "YOU") will be billed at a rate of $200/hr (in six minute increments) if such replies might be reasonably construed as soliciting a further reply...)

Re:Filota?

[spun]

No he meant Filota, the delicious Greek pastry. Yes, the universe is built out of pastry and is in fact donut shaped.

All good programmers know...

[dpaton.net]

Osborn's Law:
                Variables won't; constants aren't.

Thank the BSD fortune file on my machine at home.

Re:Interesting Things Happen At Excessive Scales

[hcob$]

Never thought I'd see the day when "Ohm's Law" and "interesting" would be used in the same sentence.

1.) Apparently, you are new here.
2.) Apparently, you are not (or have never been around) an Electrical Engineer
3.) You definately got laid before you turned 30.

Re:Interesting Things Happen At Excessive Scales

[Daniel Dvorkin]

Oops. Dvorkin's law -- "Every /. post of reasonable length will contain at least one typo, no matter how many times you use the Preview button." That should be "... calculations using it ..." above, of course.

Re:Speed of Light

[ozbird]

They just don't make photons like they use to...

If you were travelling at the speed of light for billions of years, you'd get tired too.

Re:Difference between "ARE" and "MAY"

[zolaar]

Simple explanation:

The string constants in the article also change over time.

::head explodes::

Re:Interesting Things Happen At Excessive Scales

[Bastard of Subhumani]

I've never heard of P. How does it compare to emacs?