[ExI] Fw: A preferred direction to the universe?

[The Avantguardian]

On Tuesday, April 28, 2020, 06:58:07 AM PDT, John Clark via extropy-chat <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote: 

>The universe may have a preferred direction. A new study has found a spatial variation in the Fine Structure Constant (a pure number approximately equal to 1/137) with a 3.9 sigma level of confidence, that means there is a 0.8% chance it's just a statistical fluke. It's not good enough to claim a discovery, that requires 5 sigma or only 0.023% chance of it being bogus, but it's good enough to be interesting. The detected variation has a dipole structure, the laws of physics that govern electromagnetism seem to get stronger in one direction, and the further we look the stronger it gets, and it gets weaker when we look in the oposite direction, with no change in the perpendicular direction. In other words it has a dipole shape.

>If this turns out to be true then Noether's theorem tells us that the Law Of conservation Of Angular Momentum is only approximately true. Four direct measurements of the fine-structure constant 13 billion years ago This new optical work is consistent with a different study from a few weeks ago that used  X rays instead of optical light, they also found a variation and along the same axis. Rethinking cosmology: Universe expansion may not be uniform


----------------------------------------

I seem to remember predicting that  our  universe was non-isotropic with my causal cell argument a couple of years ago. If our Hubble volume is inside a black or white hole, then it can be thought of as having particle-like properties such as mass, spin, and charge from the outside. If our Hubble volume had any angular momentum at all relative to other causal cells, then it could lead to discrepancies in Noether's theorem, since there would always be a net angular momentum left over that is never cancelled by symmetry: the spin of the universe along a spin axis as it were.

This also supports my notion that vacuum energies are not a "cosmological constant" but a function of time. If the expansion rate of the universe is not uniform, that suggests the cosmological constant is not uniform.

So I wonder if the spatial variation of the fine-structure number is large enough to influence the evolution of intelligent life? Might it serve to narrow the anthropic principle to a more localized space-time? If so, this spatial variation of the EM field could explain the Great Silence and give our universe a "Goldilocks zone".

Stuart LaForge