The laws of physics can change?

posted on September 24th, 2010, 3:06 pm

You know the famous Star Trek quote... "I canna change the laws of physics"

Well, maybe scotty can't but the universe itself maybe does.

http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2010/09/scientists-claim-laws-of-physics-change-throughout-the-universe/

Rather interesting... and quite profound implications as well.

posted on September 24th, 2010, 3:13 pm

It's called conjecture for a reason 
Seems every once in a while a string theorist or other will come up with one of these ideas - it'll make a splash for a little while - and then go quietly under the bridge.

posted on September 24th, 2010, 3:29 pm

Sure.  Maybe only 1 in a 1000000 crackpot ideas turn out to be right.  But life has shown that 1 in a million chances occur 9 times out of 10. 

Its probably quantum.

posted on September 24th, 2010, 4:08 pm

All we know is what we know... right now. Who knows how much our knowledge or what we think we know, will change as human kind progresses. One thing for sure, the answers to a lot of questions as to the beginnings of Earth and the origins of humanity are out there in the stars.

[TChapman500]

posted on September 24th, 2010, 4:16 pm

Last edited by TChapman500 on September 24th, 2010, 4:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.

If the laws of physics change by even a microscopic amount, everything would be destroyed within seconds if not instantaneously.  That has been scientifically proven.

As for what you said about the odds, you haven't studied enough math or done enough experiments to know that the mathematical odds actually are extremely accurate.

Plus, no matter what we say, you always end up saying that you're right, and everyone else is wrong.  If I could loki, I'd put you on my ignore list in an instant.

posted on September 24th, 2010, 5:03 pm

If the laws of physics change by even a microscopic amount, everything would be destroyed within seconds if not instantaneously.  That has been scientifically proven.

1) This is wrong. Science proves nothing...its not our intention.

2) How about giving some evidence...a link to the scientific paper you read this in? Or is this creationism style - shout & run?

posted on September 24th, 2010, 5:17 pm

2) How about giving some evidence...a link to the scientific paper you read this in? Or is this creationism style - shout & run?

The paper does exist, but I'm not especially fond of it  . I chuck in the same realm of some string theory things for now  . If you belong to a university you can get access to it 

posted on September 24th, 2010, 5:20 pm

Wowwwww. I would requote but...
The gist of this possible change in physical laws stems from the fact that knowing the physical nature of space and time around us doesn't necessarily say anything about it elsewhere, say in another galaxy. We can make educated assumptions, since we observe the same things in stars lightyears away as we do in our nearer neighbours. However, there is nothing to say whether their character has changed since the light from the stars left them, or that it is the same in any place, including those that are too far away to observe. There is no definite proof that they cannot change, despite a lot of evidence to the contrary.

posted on September 24th, 2010, 5:53 pm

Drrrrrr, that comment about being "Creationism style" is not necissary and is an extremely inaccurate description of what Creation Science is about.  Creation science uses the Scientific Method (theorize, put it to the test, analize the results).

Universes that have different laws, I could go for, but as far as changing those laws in the universe, there is no evidence that it can happen.  And there is too much evidence that says it can't happen.

[loki_999]

posted on September 24th, 2010, 7:24 pm

Last edited by loki_999 on September 24th, 2010, 8:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.

As for what you said about the odds, you haven't studied enough math or done enough experiments to know that the mathematical odds actually are extremely accurate.

TCR, please, did you completely fail to see the humour in that post?  I mean, i know not everyone has read Terry Pratchett's books (from where I lifted those "statistics") but I thought the humour was apparent.

Plus, no matter what we say, you always end up saying that you're right, and everyone else is wrong.  If I could loki, I'd put you on my ignore list in an instant.

Well, you are welcome to ignore my posts instead of replying to them.   :whistling:

In this case I haven't even claimed anything!  I simply posted a link about an interesting theory and made a joke.  It is you who claimed that if anything of the laws of physics changed everything would be destroyed.

Now if you look around these forums you may even find one or two posts where I admitted I was wrong over something or other   It can happen. 

EDIT: I wasn't actually going to get into the debate over whether everything would be destroyed, but as you know I am an arrogant bastard who can't resist telling everyone how right he is, so in response...

Indeed, it seems right that if the laws of physics are not constant then there is a problem with the universe.  On the other hand, it wasn't too long ago that we thought space-time was flat.  Now we think that space-time is curved by gravity.  Maybe on the very large scale (galactic or galactic cluster scale) things can warp even more than just space-time.  Maybe our perceptions of the universe are not as accurate as we believe because of these changing laws of physics.  It may explain a lot.  I mean, we have to use terms like Dark Matter and Dark Energy to cover up the fact that there are things we haven't got a proper explanation for yet (which does not prove god exists!).

posted on September 24th, 2010, 7:48 pm

If there is a law, there's a criminal who can break it. 

posted on September 24th, 2010, 9:19 pm

The "dark matter" and "dark energy" stuff is made up because no one can find any explanation for what's holding the universe together.

If space and time are bent by gravity, that would explain why light couldn't escape from a black hole or why a clock ticks faster when in orbit, but there can be another theory that explains it better.  However, this theory could by used to build a warp drive.  If gravity causes this curve in space and time, maybe the process can be reversed and directed.  That does not mean that the laws of physics change.  If you go by what has been written by man, then those "laws" will change as we increase our understanding of the universe.  Doesn't mean the actual law has changed.  It just means that the written law is wrong.

posted on September 24th, 2010, 9:21 pm

The "dark matter" and "dark energy" stuff is made up because no one can find any explanation for what's holding the universe together.

its gaffer tape.

cant break that stuff.

posted on September 24th, 2010, 9:59 pm

I don't think you'll accept a supernatural explanation would you?  Too simplistic, right?

posted on September 24th, 2010, 10:23 pm

I don't think you'll accept a supernatural explanation would you?  Too simplistic, right?

most of this thread causes me to say: tl;dr

i just saw an opportunity to make the joke that the universe is held together by gaffer tape.

i'm not actually reading the rest of it.