The dating game

According Sheldrake Dirac suggested change of G 1*10-13 per year.I don't see reason why constants couldn't change. Is it something like platonic ideas that existed before Big-bang? There was once no time, no space and yet value of constants had been fixed already and there was no change of G from the beginning? "On the beginning there was fixed Gravity constant".Materialists should consider constants and physical laws as something secondary what is function of matter and caused by matter. Not sometning platonic a-priori without beginning and end what rules the world and what the blind matter follows.Just questions.
Enjoy.

You are a hard-core darwinist who don't know where Central Asia is as far as I remember.

And yet theories that constants could change seems no to be dead. According Wikipedia on Fine-structure constant:

quote:

---

More recently, technology improvements have made it possible to probe the value of at much larger distances and to much greater accuracy. In 1999, a team lead by John K. Webb of the University of New South Wales claimed the first detection of a variation in .[9][10][11][12] Using the Keck telescopes and a data set of 128 quasars at redshifts 0.5

And this is article from 2006:

quote:

---

Our model with an inverse Dirac gravitation explains the observation of Anderson et al [2] from the motion of space probes Pioneer 10 and Pioneer 11 at distances of 10 to 15 AU from the sun, that during 8 years an additional acceleration towards the sun of aP =
(83)10-8 cm/s2 as measured in addition to the standard acceleration.
.
.
.
All these speculations may have to be modified in the case that the elementary constants h, c and e are not constant from a possible change of the fine structure constant [8] or even of c [9].

---

Fine-structure constant - WikipediaSchool of Physics | Science - UNSW Sydney

I don't see a reason why darwinists stick on unchanged values of constants. Change of constants as well as change of physical laws should be something real as change of animals. And yet darwinists - probably much more than physicists - are vey afraid of changes of constants. They are as rigid as fundamentalist. I see no reason - exept reevaluation of radioactive dating of course.