1

It strikes me as odd that universe that seems to be based on the idea of uncertainty as its building blocks, would have certain numbers defining it, that is, the universal constants.

How do we know that they are a single correct number as opposed to a range or distribution of some sort, and when we measure them, we are not just measuring the average value they take or something of this sort?

(Bonus:) Also, if one or more universal constant did take an imprecise value, would there be any way to test this?

Qmechanic
  • 201,751
user27221
  • 175
  • 1
    Because we have no reason to believe otherwise? If data suggests that might be the case, we'll have to adapt the formalism to the fact; for now, it works quite well as is. – AccidentalFourierTransform Nov 20 '19 at 02:19
  • is this an occam's razor then? I mean, if electron mass would be an imprecise value, I am sure this would mess a lot of things up, but G could totally wobble a bit and we would perhaps not be able to tell... – user27221 Nov 20 '19 at 02:43
  • 1
    The constants of nature don’t vary at the level of precision that we can measure them. So we assume they don’t vary at all. If the constants varied, then we would want a theory of how they vary. Then that theory would probably need other constants. Do you see the problem? It could be “turtles all the way down”, if you are familiar with that phrase. – G. Smith Nov 20 '19 at 03:02
  • 2
    Which constants do you have in mind? For those that have units, it's not possible to say whether or not they change. See https://physics.stackexchange.com/q/78684/ –  Nov 20 '19 at 06:16

0 Answers0