I have heard many times in news that a new discovery has taken place, and we need a new physics.

It has recently been announced in scientific news that the world is apparently expanding faster.

And guess what? Everyone says we need a new physics! I'm also interested in having a new physics, but we did not have a new physics in the past 100 years!.

Anyway, what does it mean that the universe is expanding so fast and we need a new physics?

Do we have such things as new physics or old one?

Do we really need a new physics (whatever the circumstance)?

Ref. The Universe Is Expanding So Fast We Might Need New Physics to Explain It


closed as primarily opinion-based by John Rennie, PM 2Ring, Yashas, GiorgioP, Carl Brannen Apr 27 at 0:26

Many good questions generate some degree of opinion based on expert experience, but answers to this question will tend to be almost entirely based on opinions, rather than facts, references, or specific expertise. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

  • 4
    $\begingroup$ I think with "new physics" they simply mean a new research field within physics or a new theory. In the case you are citing the latter is the case, as current theories are not able to explain the observations. $\endgroup$ – denklo Apr 26 at 7:54
  • $\begingroup$ If you read the article, instead of just quoting the title, then it's about the model being incomplete : "that we’re missing something in the cosmological model". So new theory or better detail in existing theory. $\endgroup$ – Solar Mike Apr 26 at 8:07
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ At present no-one knows, so any answers to this question can only be opinion not fact. There are experimental tensions in the value of the Hubble constant (I assume you mean this when you talk about the world is apparently expanding faster) but we don't know whether this indicates a fundamental problem with the cosmological standard model or not. $\endgroup$ – John Rennie Apr 26 at 8:08
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ "New physics" is a jargon expression especially loved by high energy physicists - but not alone. It's used every time observation or experiment seemingly don't fit into established theory. With little concern as to how deeply the disagreement would affect physics. Add journalistic emphasis... So you'd better to take such declarations with a grain of salt. This said, the discourse would be very long and surely OT for this site. $\endgroup$ – Elio Fabri Apr 26 at 10:12
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @OON This is the result of the research carried out in this regard 1905–1930: The Golden Age of Physics or Golden age of physics $\endgroup$ – The Last Jedi Apr 26 at 11:23