), for example, is about 1/137. Were it another value, matter and energy would interact in bizarre ways; indeed, the very distinction between matter and energy could melt away." data-pin-do="buttonBookmark">
HOW UNIMAGINABLY strange the world would be if the constants of nature had different values. The so-called fine-structure constant (), for example, is about 1/137. Were it another value, matter and energy would interact in bizarre ways; indeed, the very distinction between matter and energy could melt away. Image: JEAN-FRANCOIS PODEVIN
Some things never change. Physicists call them the constants of nature. Such quantities as the velocity of light, c, Newton's constant of gravitation, G, and the mass of the electron, me, are assumed to be the same at all places and times in the universe. They form the scaffolding around which the theories of physics are erected, and they define the fabric of our universe. Physics has progressed by making ever more accurate measurements of their values.
And yet, remarkably, no one has ever successfully predicted or explained any of the constants. Physicists have no idea why they take the special numerical values that they do. In SI units, c is 299,792,458; G is 6.673 X 10-11; and me is 9.10938188 X 10-31--numbers that follow no discernible pattern. The only thread running through the values is that if many of them were even slightly different, complex atomic structures such as living beings would not be possible. The desire to explain the constants has been one of the driving forces behind efforts to develop a complete unified description of nature, or "theory of everything." Physicists have hoped that such a theory would show that each of the constants of nature could have only one logically possible value. It would reveal an underlying order to the seeming arbitrariness of nature.
This article was originally published with the title Inconstant Constants.