Constants Not Constant?

grytpype writes: "According to this story, a team of astronomers have determined (based on their observations of distant quasars) that [certain physical constants] may have been different in the far past of the universe. The discovery (if validated) is said to be good news for string theorists."

Comments

Re:Good news for creationists too

[Christianfreak]

given the history of creationist lies

Before I go on let me say that I'm not a creationist and I don't really care how the universe was formed. (It was and I'm here and okay with that). I just have one question: How can you claim someone is lying when we are discussing theories? Being raised in a religious environment I must say that yes some creationist's are quacks, but some of them have done good research and have good evidence to support what they believe. On the flip side some evolutionists are quacks but some also have good theories. Just because at theory is main stream doesn't mean that it has to be true (like the theory that M$ products are great... we all know about that one :)). And religion aside, if someone did prove that someone or something created the universe wouldn't that be just as important scientifically to definitive proof that there was a Big Bang[tm] or that evolution occurs? I certainly hope there is otherwise we have some pretty biased scientists running around out there.

Basically though, please back-up your claims before running around calling people liars, thanks.

Constants not constant

[Tattva]

More and more I think that theories in physics are nothing more than successive approximations and we'll never know the true nature of existence. With some of these theories it almost feels like someone is playing a trick on us and every time we see through it a new layer of tricks is added.