Recent study forces scientists to rethink basic law of physics / 'Fine structure constant' is indeed a constant -- right?

I thought I'd give an example of a scientific controversy which has no religious or political overtones, although it could be profoundly upsetting to the entire scientific world. The idea is simple: fundamental physical constants change over time, meaning they are neither fundamental, nor constant. If true, wrap up all your physics, throw it away, and start over.

So this should be as controversial as it gets. But get this quote:

"These are very adventurous ideas -- and it's always healthy to challenge the things that 'everybody knows,' " says one of the nation's most distinguished astronomers, Robert Kirshner of Harvard.

Unless you are challenging the ideas about evolution (see the previous blog). Perhaps the real issue with evolution is that it is being challenged only with a replacement theory, not one that simply says it is wrong. Yet that is exactly what astrophysicist Michael Murphy of Cambridge University in England is proposing: that physics changes, but they don't know why or how.

See some web sites below for more on slowly changing physical "constants":

Pi and Alpha
Large Numbers