Whoa! This could change everything

[kennyc]

Laws of Physics Vary Throughout the Universe, New Study Suggests

ScienceDaily (Sep. 9, 2010) — A team of astrophysicists based in Australia and England has uncovered evidence that the laws of physics are different in different parts of the universe.

The team -- from the University of New South Wales, Swinburne University of Technology and the University of Cambridge -- has submitted a report of the discovery for publication in the journal Physical Review Letters. A preliminary version of the paper is currently under peer review.

The report describes how one of the supposed fundamental constants of Nature appears not to be constant after all. Instead, this 'magic number' known as the fine-structure constant -- 'alpha' for short -- appears to vary throughout the universe.

"After measuring alpha in around 300 distant galaxies, a consistency emerged: this magic number, which tells us the strength of electromagnetism, is not the same everywhere as it is here on Earth, and seems to vary continuously along a preferred axis through the universe," Professor John Webb from the University of New South Wales said.

"The implications for our current understanding of science are profound. If the laws of physics turn out to be merely 'local by-laws', it might be that whilst our observable part of the universe favours the existence of life and human beings, other far more distant regions may exist where different laws preclude the formation of life, at least as we know it."

Rest here: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0909004112.htm

Journal Ref:
http://arxiv.org/abs/1008.3907

[wodin]

I have often speculated that if another universal constant, the speed of light, were not actually constant, but instead varied with the age of the universe; the red shift, usually attributed to Doppler Effect could be explained for a non expanding universe.

I have neither the math nor physics background to go much farther than speculation, but if some of our more educated members would chime in I’d read their ideas with interest.

[Sparrow]

Originally Posted by wodin

I have often speculated that if another universal constant, the speed of light, were not actually constant, but instead varied with the age of the universe; the red shift, usually attributed to Doppler Effect could be explained for a non expanding universe.

I'm currently reading "Parallel Worlds" by Michio Kaku - he says there is too much helium in the universe for there not to have been a 'big bang' to create it (too much for it to have been created by other means). So that seems to be another indication of an expanding universe, emerging from a singularity.

The ScienceDaily story is intriguing - it sounds rather like ideas of different laws of nature existing in other universes.

"it might be that whilst our observable part of the universe favours the existence of life and human beings, other far more distant regions may exist where different laws preclude the formation of life, at least as we know it."
I'm never quite sure what 'observable part of the universe' means - I know it relates to what we could possibly see on Earth in terms of various froms of radiation reaching us from the rest of the cosmos - but it doesn't seem clear what fraction of the actual Universe that represents.
According to the Wiki article the observable universe could be a miniscule fraction of the whole; or the observable universe might actually be bigger than the actual universe .

[Donnageddon]

or

Study of Laws Vary Throughout Physics, New Universe Suggests.

[Graham]

Originally Posted by Donnageddon

or

Study of Laws Vary Throughout Physics, New Universe Suggests.

Graham

[FlorenceArt]

Originally Posted by Donnageddon

or

Study of Laws Vary Throughout Physics, New Universe Suggests.

I like that

Anyway, that's intriguing news but I guess we need to wait and see if this is serious research or blown-up hype, right? The laws of marketing seem to be at least as influential as the laws of physics in this world of ours.

[poohbear_nc]

seems to vary continuously along a preferred axis

as opposed to a "less preferred" axis? Is this a common word that has a different meaning in theoretical physics, or does the observer's/measurer's preference influence the result?
[Open the box Shrodinger!]

[HarryT]

I think they mean that the results are not randomly distributed, but show a systematic variation along a particular spacial axis.

[dsvick]

Hmm, that could have some pretty profound implications if it also applies to some of the higher level (ie more noticeable) laws. I wonder though if it something, along the lines of what wodin said, that is related to the age of the universe, something like how the various forces (strong, weak, etc.) separated as the universe cooled, maybe this is something of the same nature and we're just seeing two things that we originally thought were one.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by dsvick

Hmm, that could have some pretty profound implications if it also applies to some of the higher level (ie more noticeable) laws.

The fine structure constant is as fundamental as it gets; if this research turns out to be correct, then it really is an "everything changes" thing.

[Graham]

I'm intrigued by the result that there seems to be an axis along which the results vary. It suggests symmetry or development of some sort. I've no idea how to interpret the news, let's see how the physicists bounce the idea around. Hopefully they'll be able to make some predictions based on the results to further test the issue.

I'd be interested in knowing whether alternate explanations, perhaps involving changes in the geometry of spacetime, could lead to apparent changes in the laws as observed from here.

One interesting by-product of this is that if the fundamental laws can vary within the universe then there could be a vast number of regions of the universe where the environment is better or worse for life right down at the physical constants level. This means that you wouldn't need to permit the multiverse to extend the Weak Anthropic Principle to account for the astonishingly unlikely fact that nature's physical constants are finely-tuned to allow the conditions we have here for life.

Graham

[poohbear_nc]

Or will different galaxies (along the axis) just need to have their "constants" recalculated for their location?

Wonder if this is an actual measurable effect of time on physical constants? a la wodin.

[HarryT]

An example of the importance of the fine structure constant: if it were about 5% larger in magnitude than it actually is, stellar fusion would not produce any carbon, and we wouldn't be here.

This research, however, appears to be showing variations of the order of 1 part in 100,000 over a time scale of 10 billion years. For comparison, best estimates place the current age of the universe at about 13.7 billion years.

[Graham]

Large Hadron Collider:

"We've found the Higgs Boson! This vindicates the Standard Model! We now know how things work everywhere in the whole observable universe!"

Prof John Webb, et. al:

"Ah, yes, about that..."

Graham

[dsvick]

Originally Posted by poohbear_nc

Or will different galaxies (along the axis) just need to have their "constants" recalculated for their location?

Wonder if this is an actual measurable effect of time on physical constants? a la wodin.

That wold make sense too. If many of the effects we see and attribute to "The Laws of Physics" are caused by some sort of particle (like gravity and gravitons) then maybe this is just the break down of those specific particles over time, and that there is something along the axis that is accelerating it?