Rate of oscillations of electrons in H atoms are the same now as it was in the first billion years after big bang - as seen by looking at spectra of distant quazars (because quazars are far, you are looking back in time). Seeing relic background you look back into first million years after the big bang (and again if electrons behave differently than now, we would see very different picture).

Basicly, all observations so far failed to find any measurable difference in physics "now" and "then" or any measurable difference between "here" and "there" regardless how close to the beginning of big bang we look or how far in space we search. And by physics they mean all fundamental constants (grav constant G, speed of light c, Plank constant h and electron charge e) as well as fundamental laws (like conservation laws, which by the way are closely related to time and space symmetry).

Now it is a trend to assume that physics may be the same even before big bang. At least time should exist before big bang - if the big bang was triggered by the transition in false vacuum from higher energy level to lower - because time and energy are entangled quantities. Spaces of various dimensions can be created by such transition, and then the dimensionality and symmetry of space imposes certain mathematical rules on what kind of objects (electrons, gravitons, etc.) and forces can (and what kind can not) exist in such space with given certain number of dimensions.

• Yes but... - highvoltage - June 28, 2001 - 20:36 UTC
  • Observing time from diff. reference syst you get diff. values. - alexander - June 28, 2001 - 21:00 UTC
    • What about going towards each other - highvoltage - June 28, 2001 - 21:05 UTC
      • Yes, although finite speed of light makes another correction. - alexander - June 28, 2001 - 22:30 UTC
        • Forgive me but my maths skills are not great - highvoltage - June 29, 2001 - 05:37 UTC
          • Gamma =1/(1-v^2/c^2), Galilean = Lorents at c=infinity. - alexander - July 3, 2001 - 01:20 UTC