10 ms·

Why can't it be both?

• ansible 10y ago
  Aside from the high temperature of the early universe, we haven't seen evidence that the physical laws are changing over time, much less 'adapting' in some way. What's the pressure for them to change? What's the reward for them to stay stable now?
  • ivoras 10y ago
    On the other hand, we haven't directly observed the universe for a long enough time (billions of years) to say it's not changing, so we simply don't know. We don't even know if the universe is homogeneous. For example, all we know about distant stars is complete conjecture and approximation based on testing various ideas to see which one fits. We simply don't know if "gravity" is exactly the same for all of them. Small variations of G would still light them up.
    • ansible 10y ago
      We've been looking back in time billions of years, because we look at objects billions of light-years away. If there's anything amiss about how gravity or whatever isn't working like it used to, that's news to me. I haven't heard of even a hint or something like that.
  • cauterized 10y ago
    I was more asking why the two hypotheses have to be mutually exclusive.