Recently some scientists say "Some physical constants are varying with time."

 

I think it's more accurate to say that scientists ask the question and then some go and test it; this is not dogma. The list D H posted shows that sometimes you get a non-null result, but you need to make sure this is not due to some systematic error; it's curious when only one group gets an outlying answer while everyone else gets something consistent with zero, and that describes quite a bit of the state of affairs.

That's quite the bold statement! There's a huge difference between physics and philosophy: Physicists need evidence of their bold statements. One job of experimental physicists is to come up with tests that either confirm or falsify the grandiose statements made by their theoretical brethren. So they test. And test. And test again. And again. It's important.

 

 

And every test for the last hundred years has backed up the Einstein's 'grandiose statements' .

And every test for the last hundred years has backed up the Einstein's 'grandiose statements' .

Don't attribute every grandiose statement to Einstein. The ones in question are Emily Noether's, not Einstein's. Noether's Theorems are very, very profound.

 

Yet we test. We have to. It's a part of the divorce decree between physics and philosophy. Physicists have to test their ideas and use trash cans when their ideas don't pan out. Philosophers are free not to do so, but they do have to ask whether the customer wants fries with their order.

Yet we test. We have to. It's a part of the divorce decree between physics and philosophy. Physicists have to test their ideas and use trash cans when their ideas don't pan out. Philosophers are free not to do so, but they do have to ask whether the customer wants fries with their order.

 

And whether the customer has free will to choose not getting fries.

 

I might have to steal that line about the divorce decree. That's good.

I like this science forum.