News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Why scientists are redefining the kilogram by majewsky on Thursday October 26, 2017 @07:17AM (#15557879)
We have not yet seen any indication that universal constants (or any other laws of physics) would change over time, therefore Occam's Razor suggest that we continue with the assumption that they don't until contrary evidence appears.

> If the measurements used to define these constants are defined in terms of the constants themselves, how would we see change?

Either the constants change such that we can measure the effect (e.g. the mass of atoms changes but the calibration of scales does not change accordingly), or they change such that our measurement apparatuses are equally affected. In the latter case, we will not be able to see the change, but then again, you could go into epistemology and argue that nothing has happened at all.

Re:Why scientists are redefining the kilogram by fixermark on Thursday October 26, 2017 @10:36AM (#15559148)
Yep. Too far down this road, and you arrive at Wolfram's observation that, hypothetically, the entire universe could be a simulation running as a cellular automaton with a single updating agent stepping the state of the universe interaction-by-interaction. It could take an arbitrarily-long time to run one "step" of the universe in that agent's timeframe, and life existing in that universe would have no way of knowing, because all of our processes for measuring time await the touch of that updating agent to progress.