Naked Science Forum
General Science => General Science => Topic started by: jerrygg38 on 26/07/2016 13:22:36
-
Has the scientific community studied the variability of the constants of the universe? If we assume the gravitational constant and the electrical permeability and permitivity are constant then we get a truly constant universe. If we vary everything including the light speed then it becomes very difficult to write any meaningful equations. The best we can do is keep a constant light speed solution. This enables us to write variable constant equations that provide us with the value of the constants after big bang and before maximum expansion.
If the variability followed an exponential function then all the equations can be normalized so that things long ago look much the same as today. If we used a more complex function for variability then we would have little what the universe looked like billions of years ago.
What did the universe look like one billion years after big bang? Using our constants as true constant's or variable e^at type constants, the universe would look similar to now. Yet it may very well be that this period of time produces a universe today in which our constants today enable us to see a universe that matches the constants of the universe we see today.
Has any theories attempted to look at the universe from variable constants?
-
It is well known in engineering that all constants are variable (if you measure them under enough different conditions); this is a corollary of Murphy's Law (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murphy%27s_law).
Physicists are studying just how stable are the various physical constants:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time-variation_of_fundamental_constants
There was a controversial suggestion that the Fine Structure Constant may differ in different parts of the universe:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fine-structure_constant#Spatial_variation_.E2.80.93_Australian_dipole
Theoretical Physicists trying to make sense of the universe through the microscope of String Theory see no particular reason why the fundamental constants should take the values we see. They hypothesize that if you looked at 10 different universes, the fundamental constants could be radically different. This merges into the multiverse hypothesis, which at this point in time is equally unobservable.
-
What sort of constant changes do you expect? You mean to say that say the gravitational constant fluctuates, but how does it fluctuate, does it fluctuate in waves? It seems that is what your suggesting because you say that billions of years ago the universal constants fluctuate but are overall stable and return to previous constant values at other times in the universe's life.
-
What sort of constant changes do you expect? You mean to say that say the gravitational constant fluctuates, but how does it fluctuate, does it fluctuate in waves? It seems that is what your suggesting because you say that billions of years ago the universal constants fluctuate but are overall stable and return to previous constant values at other times in the universe's life.
It seems to me that if all the mass of the universe occupied a small volume and only nothingness existed outside this volume, the gravitational constant would approach zero. If this is so then nothing would hold the universe together and it would explode.
Likewise what is the gravitational constant in a black hole? It may be possible that outside the black hole it will be large or the same as now. But at the very center of the black hole it could be quite variable and low causing the energy to radiate.
The possibilities are endless and an infinity of possible universes exists. So I study one solution and it is only one possibility.