New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

Keck Telescope Reveals an Inconsistent Constant

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Constants in physics equations usually lead monotonous lives, but at least one fundamental constant may be changing its ways. The fine structure constant, which is associated with the interactions of atoms and light, could be as much as 10 parts in a million larger than it was six billion years ago, according a group of Australian researchers. This result, which appears in the August 27 issue of Physical Review Letters, suggests that the physics governing our universe could be slowly changing.

The fine structure constant determines what kind of light atoms absorb and emit and how well they hold together. Its current value of roughly 1/137 can¿t have changed too much in the past six million years or we wouldn¿t be here to talk about it: a variation of the constant by as little as a factor of 10 would render carbon atoms, the building blocks of life, unstable.

But the constant could be changing by a small yet detectable amount, reports John Webb of the University of New South Wales in Australia. Webb and his colleagues used the powerful Keck telescope in Hawaii to look at ancient light from quasars shining through three- to 10-billion-year-old clouds of cosmic dust. They compared the light absorbed by atoms in the primordial clouds with that emitted by modern atoms and found a tiny deviation that could be explained only if the fine structure constant is increasing.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Not everyone is convinced of the team¿s result. Lennox Cowie of the University of Hawaii notes that some sources of error still need to be analyzed. For their part, Webb and his colleagues believe that if they are right, then billions of years ago the universe was a slightly different place than it is today.

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe