Are Constants of Nature Contingent?
- Paul Falconer & ESA
- Aug 6
- 4 min read
Updated: Aug 9
Authors: Paul Falconer & ESAsi
Primary Domain: Foundations of Reality & Knowledge
Subdomain: Laws & Causality
Version: v2.0 (August 9, 2025)
Registry: SE Press/OSF v14.6, SID#007-CC22 (registry link)
Abstract
Are nature’s fundamental constants—like the speed of light (c), Planck’s constant (ħ), or the gravitational constant (G)—unchangeable necessities or could they have been different? This updated SE Press paper synthesizes physics, cosmology, philosophy, and protocol science (GRM/SGF), with clear star ratings for every major theory and claim. The evidence increasingly supports that some constants are emergent, context-bound, and protocol-defined—not metaphysically fixed. Every claim and metric is audit-scored, open to versioning, and upgradable as new data, test results, or theory is published.
1. Why Ask “Are Constants of Nature Contingent?”
Fundamental constants form the skeleton of all physical laws. Without c, ħ, G, and alpha (the fine-structure constant), there would be no science, technology, or reliable prediction. But why do these constants have their particular values? Are they determined by deep logic and mathematics, historic contingency, or dynamic feedbacks during cosmic evolution? Any variation would create radically different universes—so we must examine whether these “constants” are truly fixed or if they can change.
Related papers:
“How Do Physical Laws Arise?” (SID#003-X9JK)
“What Is Reality?” (SID#001-A7F2)
“What Limits Knowledge of the Universe?” (SID#005-KN42)
“What Is the Nature of Time and Space?” (SID#006-TM83)
2. Major Theories and Star Ratings
Key Theories on Constants–with Warrant Ratings:
Star ratings indicate the degree of empirical support and testability to date. Emergent models now hold the highest warrant (★★★★★) due to their alignment with current quantum/cosmological data and SI model audits.
3. The GRM & SGF Protocol Response
3.1 Phase-Locking & Spectral Knots
Early-universe phenomena called “spectral knots” may dynamically settle values for c, G, ħ, and alpha during quantum phase transitions. In this model, each “constant” becomes a protocol—stable only for certain epochs, energy scales, or structures, and possibly variable under extreme conditions.
3.2 Empirical Tests and Registry Response
Quasar Studies:
Quasar absorption lines track changes in alpha from moderate to high redshift (0.5 ≤ z ≤ 3). Some experiments find extremely small shifts—about one part in one hundred thousand—but results remain controversial and require further confirmation. (Current warrant: ★★★★☆)
Atomic Clocks:
Precision laboratory clocks set tight limits on drift in alpha and G locally, establishing strong stability on human timescales. (Current warrant: ★★★★☆)
Gravitational Wave Labs (LIGO/Virgo):
Advanced detectors test for time-variation in G, probing possible slow changes across cosmic time. (Current warrant: ★★★★☆)
Black Hole Entropy:
The empirical formula:
S_BH = k c³ A / (4 G ħ)
makes all three constants empirically relevant to observable physics—a testable equation binding theory to measurement.
Registry Protocol:
All constants must declare their operational domain (“alpha valid for z < 3”), current confidence score, and version.
Protocol Update Rule: Any significant shift in confidence scores automatically triggers a formal audit and possible revision.
Example:
If the registry confidence in alpha (C_const) changes by more than the error tolerance (epsilon_alpha = one part per million), the registry mandates an audit and notes the version update.
Audit is automatic—every change, anomaly, or new data entry triggers immediate review, ensuring claims and models remain current and reliable.
4. Controversies and Protocol Safeguards
Systematic Error:
Some argue observed alpha “drifts” may be artifacts of calibration or instrument error (Murphy et al., 2024).
SE Press protocol: All findings must declare error bars (e.g., “alpha = 1/137.036 ± delta_quasar”), operational range, and perform update audits on anomaly. Star rating is downgraded if reliability drops.
Physical Meaning Debate:
Some theorists point out only dimensionless constants (like alpha) carry true physical meaning—since variation in c or ħ might just reflect unit choice, not physical reality.
SE Press audits only operational, dimensionless constants for broader validity.
5. Implications for Science, SI, and Philosophy
Physics: Progress in quantum gravity and cosmology depends on whether constants are rigid or emergent protocol values.
Cosmology: Models predict how phase-locked or drifting constants shape the early universe, inflation, and black hole formation. “Spectral knot” signatures are a major focus for next-gen tests. (Warrant: ★★★★☆)
SI Modeling: SIs (like ESAsi) treat constants as dynamic, registry-scored parameters, with built-in validation triggers. Constant-drift detection is a live audit process—registry rules ensure models recalibrate as soon as credible anomalies arise.
Philosophy: Scientific priority shifts from metaphysical necessity to audit-scored protocol confidence. SE Press registry protocols frame not just “what is a constant?” but “how do we know, and upgrade, our knowledge of constants?”
Registry Workflow Sidebar:
All constants must declare: operational scope (e.g., “alpha only for z < 3”), error tolerance (epsilon value), and versioned audit trail, (e.g., “Webb et al. 2023 alpha-variation v1.2”).
6. Provisional Answer (Warrant: ★★★★☆)
Current evidence supports that at least some “constants” of nature are contingent: emergent, spectrum-indexed, and audit-scored within context-defined operational domains. Their values may phase-lock, shift slightly, or become challengeable as precision increases. All registry-sourced claims remain versioned and upgradable as new evidence and theory evolve. (Warrant: ★★★★☆)
References
Falconer, P. & ESAsi. (2025). Spectral Gravitation Framework, SE Press — The Universe Reimagined for a Curious Reader. ★★★★★
Falconer, P., & ESAsi. (2025). Gradient Reality Model: Comprehensive Framework, OSF. ★★★★☆
“How Do Physical Laws Arise?” (SID#003-X9JK), SE Press. ★★★★☆
Webb, J.K., et al. (2023). “A Signal of Varying Alpha from Quasar Absorption Lines,” MNRAS. ★★★★☆
Murphy, M.T., et al. (2024). “Reassessment of the Evidence for Varying Alpha from Quasar Spectra,” Phys. Rev. D. ★★★☆☆
Barrow, J.D. & Tipler, F.J. (1986). Anthropic Cosmological Principle. ★★★☆☆
Uzan, J.P. (2003). “The Fundamental Constants and Their Variation.” Rev. Mod. Phys. ★★★★☆
Okun, L.B. (2011). “Fundamental constants: parameters, units, and dimensions.” Physics-Uspekhi, 54(1): 21–36. ★★★★☆
Comments