Just a quick question.It seems like if there where not a universal constant all matter would fly apart or shift in and out of different states erratically.
any thoughts?

What "universal constant" are you writing about? Is it something that is already defined or just something you thought up on your own?

If it's the latter, what kind of properties do you posit and what kind of test(s) will reveal its existence?

Just wondering.

Well I don't know about any of that, but here's an intersting article for you to read on the possibility that the universal constants might not be quite so constant.

"crusadex Posted on Dec 22 2005, 04:12 AM" to start this discussion:
"Just a quick question.It seems like if there where not a universal constant all matter would fly apart or shift in and out of different states erratically.
any thoughts?"

"CactusCritter Posted on Dec 28 2005, 06:47 AM" was my response:
'What "universal constant" are you writing about? Is it something that is already defined or just something you thought up on your own?

'If it's the latter, what kind of properties do you posit and what kind of test(s) will reveal its existence?

'Just wondering.'

"ubavontuba Posted on Dec 31 2005, 10:01 PM" an interesting suggestion.
"Well I don't know about any of that, but here's an intersting article for you to read on the possibility that the universal constants might not be quite so constant."

It has been about 54 years since I finished the course work for my B.Sc. in Physics from Ohio State University which included two one-quarter courses on quantum mechanics.

The URL led to an article a noticeably beyond my comfort level. I don't know about your comfort level, ubavontuba. However, it was quite interesting exposition on the fine structure constant and rather impressive. crusadex, I suspect may be left even further behind. In my defense, I have read Scientific American for many years and Science News, for a fewer number of years. I have also read a number of science popularizations, including string theory.

Hopefully, someone better informed than me will browse through this particula forum and answer the specific question asked by crusadex.

crusadex and CactusCritter,

Everything in physics is "beyond my comfort level." That's what makes it fun. It's like an intellectual version of an amusement park. You just don't know what'll turn up around the next corner!

Anyway... upon conducting a bit of research on this, (besides getting a headache) I've found that there seems to be two divisive encampments. On the one hand there are those that support the first article I referenced and on the other there are those that refute it.

Here's a more recent article in support: Sacred Universal Constant Might Be Changing

And here's a counter article from the same source one week later: Universal Constant Unchanged in 7 billion years

Personally, I doubt that the universal constants can change. I think crusadex is right in realizing that if they could, there'd potentially be no cohesiveness to the universe.

But then on the other hand (assuming the universe had a beginning) what was the kicker that started the universe to begin with? Maybe a dramatic but arbitrary change in the laws of physics? Who knows?