It鈥檚 the evidence that counts, not our prejudices, even when that means overturning what we thought were fundamental ideas
THE cosmos can at times seem an unfathomable place, but beneath its mind-boggling complexity there has always been a solid foundation: confidence that the laws of nature are always and everywhere the same. Now that cherished notion might have to be discarded.
This week, we report on a decade of painstaking research that suggests the laws vary across the cosmos. If this is correct, our understanding of the universe is in for as profound a revision as the one Einstein started.
Advertisement
That is a big 鈥渋f鈥�, of course. Very few physicists believe these results can be correct. The lead investigator, John Webb of the University of New South Wales in Sydney, Australia, is universally recognised as honest, competent and conscientious, and many people we spoke to about the work lauded him as a top-tier scientist pursuing something worthwhile. Even so, the general feeling is that his conclusions just can鈥檛 be right.
Here is the eternal dilemma of science. Its default state of organised scepticism has proved extremely fruitful in our quest to determine how the universe works. But scepticism needs to be tempered with open-mindedness. Unexpected and inexplicable experimental observations sometimes lead to significant breakthroughs.
When Webb and his team first claimed to have found evidence that the laws of physics are not fixed, they were rightly told to go away, check their results and come back with more supporting evidence. That they have now done. Yet too many physicists still dismiss the work out of hand. Musings that they are 鈥減robably wrong鈥� or that there 鈥渕ust be a mistake somewhere鈥� will get us nowhere.
Webb is either right or he is wrong. The scientific process will decide which. So it seems odd that his colleagues are not clamouring to get involved, either to look for ways to corroborate his results or find the fatal flaw that they seem so sure must be there.
On offer is the possibility of participating in a once-in-a-century revolution 鈥� or, alternatively, confirming that our model of the universe is largely correct. Sometimes organised scepticism needs to be shaken out of its comfort zone.
鈥淥n offer is the possibility of participating in a once-in-a-century scientific revolution鈥�