Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

DudoVene t1_iyxkssw wrote

as a naive assessment, enstein formula's describe a constant equilibrium between energy and mass, including C constant (velocity in vaccum of ANY mass-less particle, not only photons).

consequently, a variation in C whenever you want during the life of the universe would have provoked a variation in energy itself.

as a less naive argument, physical constants were discovered step by step but every fundamental values seem to be linked to each other, building up few but solid equations describing the universe, in past, present, and future time. Science itself walks forward by successive discoveries. today, relativity and quantic physic are our best models of the universe and rely on such constant (and make it far more easy with math!). but there is a chance a breakthrou happens and shows variations in what we consider (very strongly) today as constants.

−3

BlueRajasmyk2 t1_iyzpu75 wrote

Energy is not a conserved quantity in General Relativity because the theory is not time-symmetric. Hence the whole "dark energy is increasing" thing.

2

The_Dark_Passenger93 OP t1_iyxm4hi wrote

I see your point there, excellent answer. The idea of a great breakthrough in physics always gives the goosebumps.

1

DudoVene t1_iyxnfnl wrote

thanks. but honestly, this is mostly an intellectual effort. what actual physics can tell us about the universe is REALLY stunning and seems to answer anything better than any other approach (personnal opinion). but this knoweldge was gained by the ability to fight what we believed and only keep what is strongly demonstrated. the only counter argument I have in mind is the Hawkin beam from black hole wich freely assume those object obey to entropy law. I will personnaly blindly follow the theoric demonstration and "praise" to see evidence while I am still alive.

2

The_Dark_Passenger93 OP t1_iyxo92x wrote

I agree with you, our current rules of physics explains so many phenomenons with such accuracy that it's an approval for our physics in general. And the approach of correcting ourselves when we find a better explanation is really necessary if we are about to go forward.

About the Hawking radiation, it really fascinates me as well, sadly I don't have enough technical savvy on the subject so I will follow you, accept and "praise".

2