Gravitational-Wave Discovery --"Is Going to be Central to Human's Exploration of the Universe for Centuries"
New Mars Discovery: Network of Ancient Fossil Rivers --"Points to a Once Warm, Wet Planet"

Our Solar System "Is in a Unique Place in the Universe -- Just Right for Life"



Our solar system is in a unique area of the universe that's conducive to life, says John Webb and his colleagues at the University of New South Wales, who have carried out intensive study that threatens to turn the world of theoretical physics upside down.

The team studied the fine structure in the spectral lines of the light from distant quasars from data from the Very Large Telescope (VLT) in Chile with stunning results that showed that one of the constants of nature --the Alpha appears to be different in different parts of the cosmos, supporting the theory that our solar system is in a part of the universe that is "just right" for life, which negates Einstein's equivalence principle, which states that the laws of physics are the same everywhere.

The "magic number," known as Alpha or the fine-structure constant, appears to vary throughout the Universe, concluded the team from the University of New South Wales, Swinburne University of Technology and the University of Cambridge.

"What they found threatens to turn the world of theoretical physics upside down," said theorectical physicist, Paul Davies of Arizona State in an article in Cosmos this past January. "On the face of it, α has slightly different values in different parts of the Universe, implying that the fine structure constant is not a constant at all, but varies over cosmological distances and times."

"This finding in 2015 was a real surprise to everyone," said John Webb of the University of New South Wales in Sydney, Australia. The change in the constant appears to have an orientation, creating a "preferred direction", or axis, across the cosmos, an idea that was dismissed more than 100 years ago with the creation of Einstein's special theory of relativity.

“After measuring alpha in around 300 distant galaxies, a consistency emerged: this magic number, which tells us the strength of electromagnetism, is not the same everywhere as it is here on Earth, and seems to vary continuously along a preferred axis through the Universe,” said Webb.

“The implications for our current understanding of science are profound. If the laws of physics turn out to be merely “local by-laws”, it might be that whilst our observable part of the Universe favors the existence of life and human beings, other far more distant regions may exist where different laws preclude the formation of life, at least as we know it.

“If our results are correct, clearly we shall need new physical theories to satisfactorily describe them.”

The researchers' conclusions are based on new measurements taken with the Very Large Telescope (VLT) in Chile, along with their previous measurements from the world’s largest optical telescopes at the Keck Observatory, in Hawaii.



The core finding of the new study is the fine structure constant (alpha). This number determines the strength of interactions between light and matter. A decade ago, Webb used observations from the Keck telescope in Hawaii to analyze the light from distant galaxies called quasars. The data suggested that the value of alpha was very slightly smaller when the quasar light was emitted 12 billion years ago than it appears in laboratories on Earth today.

Webb's colleague Julian King, also of the University of New South Wales, has analyzed data from the Very Large Telescope (VLT) in Chile (below), which looks at a different region of the sky. The VLT data suggests that the value of alpha elsewhere in the Universe is very slightly bigger than on Earth.

The difference in both cases is around a millionth of the value alpha has in our region of space, and suggests that alpha varies in space rather than time. "I'd quietly hoped we'd simply find the same thing that Keck found," King says. "This was a real shock."

King says that after combining the two sets of measurements, the new result "struck" them: "The Keck telescopes and the VLT are in different hemispheres; they look in different directions through the Universe. Looking to the north with Keck we see, on average, a smaller alpha in distant galaxies, but when looking south with the VLT we see a larger alpha.

"It varies by only a tiny amount –- about one part in 100,000 -– over most of the observable Universe, but it's possible that much larger variations could occur beyond our observable horizon."

Michael Murphy, of Swinburne University of Technology, says the discovery will force scientists to rethink their understanding of Nature's laws.

"The fine structure constant, and other fundamental constants, are absolutely central to our current theory of physics. If they really do vary, we'll need a better, deeper theory," Dr. Murphy says.

While a "varying constant" would shake our understanding of the world around us, Dr. Murphy notes: "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. What we're finding is extraordinary, no doubt about that.

"It's one of the biggest questions of modern science –- are the laws of physics the same everywhere in the Universe and throughout its entire history? We're determined to answer this burning question one way or the other."

The team's analysis of around 300 measurements of alpha in light coming from various points in the sky suggests the variation is not random but structured, like a bar magnet. The Universe seems to have a large alpha on one side and a smaller alpha on the other.

This "dipole" alignment nearly matches that of a stream of galaxies mysteriously moving towards the edge of the Universe. It does not, however, line up with another unexplained dipole, dubbed the axis of evil, in the afterglow of the Big Bang.

Earth sits somewhere in the middle of the extremes for alpha. If correct, the result would explain why alpha seems to have the finely tuned value that allows chemistry – and thus biology – to occur. Grow alpha by 4 per cent, for instance, and the stars would be unable to produce carbon, making our biochemistry impossible.

If the interpretation of the light is correct, it is "a huge deal", agrees Craig Hogan, head of the Fermilab Center for Particle Astrophysics in Batavia, Illinois. But like Cowie, he told New Scientist that he suspects there is an error somewhere in the analysis. "I think the result is not real," he says.

Michael Murphy of Swinburne University in Australia, a co-author of the paper, says that the evidence for changing constants is piling up. "We just report what we find, and no one has been able to explain away these results in a decade of trying," Murphy told New Scientist. "The fundamental constants being constant is an assumption. We're here to test physics, not to assume it."

Today's Most Popular

The Daily Galaxy via,,



So is the difference 1 part in 100,000 or 1 in 1,000,000?
Neither is close to 4% and they checked to 12,000,000,000 light years which is around half of the estimated size of the universe, even if we'll never see it. Sounds like stars produce carbon everywhere there is.

I would assume that alpha is related to the rate of change of time and the distance of the standard distance as the universe expands from the central point.

A "Unique" solar system is ours - for our form of life.

They checked over there and came up a bit short. Then they checked a different area and came up with a bit too much. There are two possible explanations: 1) The difference is experimental error and the fine structure constant is constant. or 2) it must be varying: higher in that direction and lower in the other direction!! It's like if I put my hand out one window and feel a slight breeze from the East, and put it out another window and feel a slight breeze from the West, that I use that to justify my claim that the wind is circling my house.

The claims made in this article are sensationalized. I am extremely skeptical.

They're talking heresy to suggest our solar system is a "unique" place in the universe.
Not with the crowd that revels in how infinitesimal we humans are.


Let's just raise a stinkstorm here -
That's what the Bible tells us.

Bollocks. The science is settled on this. There can be no arguing with settled science. Someone needs to pull Dr. Webb's funding.

Rich Speicher - I read your comment in the sarcastic. "Settled Science" is an oxymoron and is used only by someone with an agenda - financial or political - or both.

4711 Wrenwood Lane

So the entire article pushes a concept until the 2nd-to-last paragraph, where the head of the FCPA attributes the discrepancy to a likely error, agreeing with the mysterious "Cowie."
Please, give us the full story or give us nothing at all.

we know now of course that the universe is expanding at a faster rate not slowing down which would affect their analysis and is not something they took into consideration that along with what looks to be a dodgy analysis pretty much set this aside especially since no other scientists have been able to confirm it - of course the Intelligent Design idiots will jump on it as proof a magic man in the sky done it...

The axis of evil was found in the CMBR. All findings from the study of the CMBR must be taken with extreme prejudice, until studies by the Australian astrophysicist Stephen Crothers are refuted. He calls into question the use of black body radiation as applied to solids by Kirchoff and Planck as simply erroneous when applied to the gaseous universe, let alone that all satellite shielding is inadequate to stop the detection of microwaves from water on the earth. That is, all the study and hundreds of millions of dollars in research spent on CMBR as relating to proving the big bang for the past 70 years has been a colossal boondoggle by scientists caught up in group think. The axis of evil is merely an eartfh proximal artifact. Real brainy, guys, you detected that there are symmetries to microwave radiation based on the concentrations of water around our equator and the plain of the ecliptic! Definitely Nobel Science Award material these days.

In other words , I think it is a testimony to scientific method of their work that they found no correlation with their data to potentially bad data of the CMBR.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Your Information

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)