Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and beginning April 20th, 2021 (Eastern Time) the Yahoo Answers website will be in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.
Trending News
The Alpha Constant, is it constant?
A recent question about relativity made me look at research into the Alpha, or Fine Structure constant. Hidden amongst this I found the work of Jim Webb, an astronomer at the University Of New South Wales, in Australia. His research would suggest that the size of the Alpha constant varies depending on which direction you view the Universe from. This throws into question the idea of Lorenz symmetry, one of the fundamentals of Einstein's theory, now there are a number of possibilities that this throws up.
A. Einstein was wrong and we go back to the idea of the, “ether”?
B. We accept ideas about dimensions theoretically suggested by string theory?
C These are just localised anomalies caused by as yet undiscovered effects of things akin to the axis in the Cosmic Microwave Background?
Can any of you shed any further light on this? Do you think we need a new Physics or Maths to explain this?
1 Answer
- Anonymous1 decade agoFavorite Answer
The work you reference has recently been shown to be in question. All sorts of "odd things" have been observed in Australia, including variance in nuclear decay rates. Most likely different interpretations of what metrology is about.
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2...
Alpha has some possible variance with time, but likely none in direction.
A. Lorentz aethers survive Special Relativity, but not General Relativity, and are complete non-sequitur to quantum mechanics.
B. As soon as string theory makes a quantifiable prediction that can be falsified, we can get closer to an answer to that. Until then, it has every other observation included in it, so it cannot be wrong, and is therefore "everything but the kitchen sink". In other words, entirely useless.
C. No the anisotropy in the CMBR matches the anisotropy in our motion with respect to the Universe at large, and we do have energetic particles coming through our solar system anisotropically. Likely the observation you cite is localized to Australia for now.
Until we *exchange* observers, we don't need new maths or physics.