Dependence of physical constants on each other
Hi Rabbi.
I saw that you were asked whether it might not be possible to prove the existence of God from the correspondence between the constants of physics, because perhaps there are several constants that depend on each other, and when one allows life, the other is automatically adjusted to an exact value that allows life.
You answered that even if there are two constants that depend on each other, then it only removes one constant (instead of matching 6 constants, there is a matching of 5).
And my little ego doesn’t understand how this reduces the number of constants from which it is possible to prove, because even if the two constants depend on each other, this itself is not necessary, but rather stems from a very specific mechanism, which causes that if G is equal to 6.67 then Planck’s constant is equal to the number x that allows life (this is just an example). As long as it is possible to imagine a world in which a life-supporting value of G does not give a life-supporting value of Planck’s constant, the question will return to the current mechanism: why is the universe structured in such a special way that one constant that supports life “is enough” and in any case the other constants are necessarily derived from it and receive a life-supporting value.
As long as you haven’t shown that there is a *logical* or *mathematical* necessity for a certain value of G to result in a certain value of Planck, then we can’t say that we “lost” one constant.
Regards.
If the dependence between constants is itself a law of nature, then there is no dependence (because the hanging mechanism itself would contain another constant). What is meant here is logical-mathematical dependence, not scientific dependence. This is exactly what you wrote at the end of your statement.
Do you have an example of constants that are logically - mathematically - dependent on each other, where there could be no other dependency?
If there is a constant X and a constant Y that for some logical reason X=3Y. I didn't understand the question. You yourself said it, so what is not clear here? I didn't say that in reality there are such constants, but only what the states of affairs could be.
Regarding our actual world, there is an identity between inertial and gravitational mass, and Einstein explained that it is actually the same constant (which expresses the curvature of space created by mass). This is an example of an apparent logical dependence, but not really. A space is created that is curved by masses, and this is what creates the dependence.
That's exactly what I meant, do we know of the existence of such constants in practice, because atheists claim that there are, and in practice I haven't found one.
It always turns out in the end that there is indeed a connection between the constants, but the connection itself stems from an equation that is not necessary, or from a certain property of mass/space that is itself not necessary.
Don't you know of such a thing in practice?
There are many relationships, so they defined six independent constants. There is a relationship between the speed of light in a vacuum and the speed in a vacuum (via the dielectric constant). There are many other relationships, but as mentioned, the discussion is meaningless.
*Logical connections*!! Not just any connections.
This is an undefined question. Everything that is logically related is not two constants but one. So if you ask whether there is an example of two constants that are logically related - there is none in the definition. But as mentioned, that doesn't mean anything. I think this is the place to end.
Leave a Reply
Please login or Register to submit your answer
