The fine-structure constant is varying across time & space

The nature of the universe: Ye cannae change the laws of physics | The
Economist
"What they found shocked them. The further back they looked with the
VLT, the larger alpha seemed to be—in seeming contradiction to the
result they had obtained with the Keck. They realised, however, that
there was a crucial difference between the two telescopes: because they
are in different hemispheres, they are pointing in opposite directions.
Alpha, therefore, is not changing with time; it is varying through
space. When they analysed the data from both telescopes in this way,
they found a great arc across the sky. Along this arc, the value of
alpha changes smoothly, being smaller in one direction and larger in the
other. The researchers calculate that there is less than a 1% chance
such an effect could arise at random. Furthermore, six of the quasars
were observed with both telescopes, allowing them to get an additional
handle on their errors.

If the fine-structure constant really does vary through space, it may
provide a way of studying the elusive “higher dimensions” that many
theories of reality predict, but which are beyond the reach of particle
accelerators on Earth. In these theories, the constants observed in the
three-dimensional world are reflections of what happens in higher
dimensions. It is natural in these theories for such constants to change
their values as the universe expands and evolves. "
http://www.economist.com/node/169411...41123&fsrc=rss

Dear Yousuf Khan:

On Sep 2, 6:34*pm, Yousuf Khan wrote:
The nature of the universe: Ye cannae change the laws
of physics | The Economist
"What they found shocked them. The further back they
looked with the VLT, the larger alpha seemed to be—in
seeming contradiction to the result they had obtained
with the Keck. They realised, however, that there was
a crucial difference between the two telescopes: because
they are in different hemispheres, they are pointing in
opposite directions.
Alpha, therefore, is not changing with time; it is varying
through space. When they analysed the data from both
telescopes in this way, they found a great arc across
the sky. Along this arc, the value of alpha changes
smoothly, being smaller in one direction and larger in
the other. The researchers calculate that there is less
than a 1% chance such an effect could arise at random.
Furthermore, six of the quasars were observed with both
telescopes, allowing them to get an additional handle on
their errors.

If the fine-structure constant really does vary through
space, it may provide a way of studying the elusive
“higher dimensions” that many theories of reality predict,
but which are beyond the reach of particle accelerators
on Earth. In these theories, the constants observed in the
three-dimensional world are reflections of what happens
in higher dimensions. It is natural in these theories for
such constants to change their values as the universe
expands and evolves.
"http://www.economist.com/node/16941123?story_id=16941123&fsrc=rss

There's a fine kettle of fish!

Let's add some (closely) associated papers.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1008.3957
http://arxiv.org/abs/1008.3907

Wonder if the purported variation of radioactive isotopes is
associated too...

Yousuf, I think we may be on the doorstep of "interesting times".

David A. Smith

On 9/2/2010 10:32 PM, dlzc wrote:
There's a fine kettle of fish!

Let's add some (closely) associated papers.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1008.3957
http://arxiv.org/abs/1008.3907

Yes, kettle of fish indeed.

Wonder if the purported variation of radioactive isotopes is
associated too...

I doubt it, it would have more to do with neutrinos from the Sun.

Yousuf, I think we may be on the doorstep of "interesting times".

David A. Smith

No more than the last couple of decades.

Yousuf Khan

On 02/09/2010 9:34 PM, Yousuf Khan wrote:
The nature of the universe: Ye cannae change the laws of physics | The
Economist
http://www.economist.com/node/169411...41123&fsrc=rss

Here's another article about it, this time from a Physics-related
publication.

Changes spotted in fundamental constant - physicsworld.com
"The discovery – dubbed by one physicist not involved in the work as the
"physics news of the year" – is further evidence that α may not be
constant after all. If correct, the conclusion would violate a
fundamental tenet of Einstein's general theory of relativity. The nature
of the asymmetry in α – dubbed the "Australian dipole" – could also
point scientists towards a single unified theory of physics and shed
further light on the nature of the universe. "
http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/43657

Yousuf Khan

Dear Yousuf Khan:

On Sep 2, 8:35*pm, Yousuf Khan wrote:
On 9/2/2010 10:32 PM, dlzc wrote:

There's a fine kettle of fish!

Let's add some (closely) associated papers.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1008.3957
http://arxiv.org/abs/1008.3907

Yes, kettle of fish indeed.

Wonder if the purported variation of radioactive
isotopes is associated too...

I doubt it, it would have more to do with neutrinos
from the Sun.

The same difference in atomic decay rates is present northern to
sourthern hemisphere too. God, I hope its not a "transfer standard"
problem...

Yousuf, I think we may be on the doorstep of
"interesting times".

No more than the last couple of decades.

David A. Smith

On Sep 2, 7:34*pm, Yousuf Khan wrote:
The nature of the universe: Ye cannae change the laws of physics | The
Economist
"What they found shocked them. The further back they looked with the
VLT, the larger alpha seemed to be—in seeming contradiction to the
result they had obtained with the Keck. They realised, however, that
there was a crucial difference between the two telescopes: because they
are in different hemispheres, they are pointing in opposite directions.
Alpha, therefore, is not changing with time; it is varying through
space. When they analysed the data from both telescopes in this way,
they found a great arc across the sky. Along this arc, the value of
alpha changes smoothly, being smaller in one direction and larger in the
other. The researchers calculate that there is less than a 1% chance
such an effect could arise at random. Furthermore, six of the quasars
were observed with both telescopes, allowing them to get an additional
handle on their errors.

If the fine-structure constant really does vary through space, it may
provide a way of studying the elusive “higher dimensions” that many
theories of reality predict, but which are beyond the reach of particle
accelerators on Earth. In these theories, the constants observed in the
three-dimensional world are reflections of what happens in higher
dimensions. It is natural in these theories for such constants to change
their values as the universe expands and evolves. "http://www.economist.com/node/16941123?story_id=16941123&fsrc=rss

In about 1981, I first conceived of a model
for the atom where the electrons would be
ordered in a spinning ring that precessed
to sweep out a sphere. Since a spinning ring
of electrons must create a magnetic field at
right-angles to its center, I started looking out
for parallels.

In 1984 the VLA discovered a huge magnetic arc
rising at right-angles to the center of the Milky Way.

Look out Science- here come the big radio telescopes!!


john
galaxy model for the atom

On 03/09/2010 12:03 PM, dlzc wrote:
Dear Yousuf Khan:

On Sep 2, 8:35 pm, Yousuf wrote:
On 9/2/2010 10:32 PM, dlzc wrote:
Wonder if the purported variation of radioactive
isotopes is associated too...

I doubt it, it would have more to do with neutrinos
from the Sun.

The same difference in atomic decay rates is present northern to
sourthern hemisphere too. God, I hope its not a "transfer standard"
problem...

What's a "transfer standard" problem?

Yousuf Khan

Dear Yousuf Khan:

On Sep 3, 10:50*am, Yousuf Khan wrote:
On 03/09/2010 12:03 PM,dlzcwrote:
On Sep 2, 8:35 pm, Yousuf *wrote:
On 9/2/2010 10:32 PM,dlzcwrote:
Wonder if the purported variation of radioactive
isotopes is associated too...

I doubt it, it would have more to do with neutrinos
from the Sun.

The same difference in atomic decay rates is present
northern to sourthern hemisphere too. *God, I hope its
not a "transfer standard" problem...

What's a "transfer standard" problem?

In metrology, you have to make a "duplicate" of some standard
measurement, and transfer it to the instruments you actually use to
make measurements ("Paris" to Austrailia, say). Then you check and
make sure they (the instrument and the transfer standard) agree
periodically, and update your transfer standard periodically as well.

If one "hemisphere" has different measurements for "everything", they
may simply have a metrology problem, and no new physics is required.

This sort of problem is why the historical measurements of c were all
over the place (at some scales), for example.

Be a shame if it were that simple. I think we'd need to swap
researchers, next.

David A. Smith

Yousuf Khan wrote:
[...]

1) "The Economist"
2) The systematic errors involved in determining the fine structure constant
from quasars are huge.

I've read enough papers on this to be sick and ****ing tired of aussies
announcing how the fine structure constant isn't.