Confirmation of varying fine-structure constant

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter TrickyDicky
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Constant
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the implications of a potentially varying fine-structure constant, as suggested by recent observations related to quasars. Participants explore the theoretical and observational aspects of this finding, questioning its validity and implications for our understanding of the universe.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants reference articles discussing the implications of a varying fine-structure constant, suggesting it could indicate an infinite universe, particularly in the context of FRW cosmologies.
  • There is speculation that fundamental constants such as e, Eo, hbar, or c may have changed over the history of the universe, with a proposed variation of up to 50 parts per million.
  • One participant expresses skepticism about the findings, noting that the results are based on a limited number of quasars and questioning the representativeness of the sample, particularly regarding the dipole observed.
  • Concerns are raised about the isotropy of the universe, with a participant suggesting that a dipole variation in the fine-structure constant should have been detected through other means if it were true.
  • Another participant points out the peculiar alignment of the dipole equator with the ecliptic, suggesting it warrants further investigation.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally express skepticism about the findings related to the varying fine-structure constant, with no consensus reached on the validity of the results or their implications. Multiple competing views remain regarding the interpretation of the data and its significance.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights limitations in the observational data, including the small sample size of quasars used to support claims of a varying fine-structure constant and the potential biases in their distribution across the sky.

TrickyDicky
Messages
3,507
Reaction score
28
http://theconversation.edu.au/is-life-on-earth-due-to-a-quirk-in-the-laws-of-physics-4153

http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/1008/1008.3907v2.pdf

Also discussed here:
http://scienceblogs.com/startswithabang/

Certainly this has a lot of far reaching implications (perhaps even more than FTL neutrinos): but I have some questions: Webb says one consequence/explanation of this could be that our universe is infinite, I fail to see how this is a surprise, actually the FRW universes with flat and hyperbolic spatial curvature (open universes) are infinite, right?
Also when it says that this finding breaks the Equivalence principle I guess he is referring to the "Einstein equivalence principle" (see wikipedia) version that I think is basically WEP+Lorent invariance?

ADDED: I have just seen a similar thread has been opened in the astrophysics subforum, I leave it to the Mentors to decide whether to merge my post or not.
 
Last edited:
Space news on Phys.org
The fine structure constant could have varied by up to 50 parts per million.
So one or more of e, Eo, hbar, or c have changed over the history of the universe?

A new breed of Astro Physicst?
http://scienceblogs.com/startswithabang/
 
I'm still exceedingly suspicious of this result. It looks like the result comes out of just a handful of the total quasars observed (most of the quasars observed lie along the equatorial plane, with just a few in the direction where the dipole is claimed to be).

I probably won't be convinced without some independent measure of the fine structure constant. And I'd also like to see far more quasars observed near the poles of this estimated dipole.
 
Chalnoth said:
I'm still exceedingly suspicious of this result. It looks like the result comes out of just a handful of the total quasars observed (most of the quasars observed lie along the equatorial plane, with just a few in the direction where the dipole is claimed to be).

I probably won't be convinced without some independent measure of the fine structure constant. And I'd also like to see far more quasars observed near the poles of this estimated dipole.
Of course it is a suspicious finding, and I agree the fact that it has a dipole form makes it even more so (it would seem that such a departure from isotropy would have been observed in other ways), they probably jump to quickly to the conclusion that "the strength of electromagnetism changes gradually from one “side” of the universe to another".
There's also something odd about the dipole equator in that it seems to follow the ecliptic.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 124 ·
5
Replies
124
Views
24K
  • · Replies 74 ·
3
Replies
74
Views
14K
  • · Replies 163 ·
6
Replies
163
Views
29K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
6K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
780
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
6K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
6K