Rethinking the Constants of Nature: A Radical New Perspective on Physics

 J. Rogers, SE Ohio, 23 Mar 2025, 1940

For over a century, physicists have treated fundamental constants like the speed of light ($c$), Planck’s constant ($h$), and Boltzmann’s constant ($k$) as fixed numbers that nature has handed down to us. These constants appear in countless equations, from Einstein’s $E=m{c}^2$ to Planck’s law of blackbody radiation. But what if these constants aren’t just arbitrary numbers? What if they hold the key to a simpler, more unified understanding of the universe?

A groundbreaking new framework suggests that $c$, $h$, and $k$ are not just empirical values—they are unit scaling factors that reveal the deep interconnectedness of physical laws. By redefining how we think about these constants, we can achieve a radical simplification of physics, unifying mass, energy, frequency, and temperature in a way that has eluded scientists for decades.

---

The Traditional View: Constants as "Mysterious Numbers"

In the traditional framework, fundamental constants are seen as fixed properties of nature, determined by experiment. For example:

• $c$ (the speed of light) is  299,792,458 meters per second.

• $h$ (Planck’s constant) is about $6.626\times 10^{-34}$ joule-seconds.

• $k$ (Boltzmann’s constant) is roughly $1.381\times 10^{-23}$ joules per kelvin.

These values are precise, but they seem arbitrary. Why does $c$ have this specific value? Why does $h$ appear in quantum mechanics, while $k$ shows up in thermodynamics? For decades, physicists have treated these constants as empirical facts, without questioning their deeper meaning.

---

The New Framework: Constants as Unit Scaling Factors

The new framework proposes a radical shift in perspective: $c$, $h$, and $k$ are not just numbers—they are unit scaling factors that encode the relationships between different physical quantities. Here’s how it works:

• $c$: Converts between space (meters) and time (seconds). By setting $c=1$, we redefine the meter so that $1\text{meter}=1\text{light-second}$. This unifies space and time, as described by relativity.

• 
  

• $h$: Converts between frequency (Hz) and energy (J). By setting $h=1$, we redefine the kilogram so that $1\text{kg}=1\text{Hz}$. This unifies mass and frequency, as described by quantum mechanics.

• 
  

• $k$: Converts between temperature (K) and energy (J). By setting $k=1$, we redefine the kelvin so that $1\text{K}=1\text{Hz}$. This unifies temperature and frequency, as described by thermodynamics.

• 
  

In this framework, the constants $c$, $h$, and $k$ are not arbitrary—they are the keys to unifying physical laws. By recognizing their role as unit scaling factors, we can simplify physics and reveal the deep connections between mass, energy, frequency, and temperature.

---

Objections and Responses

1. "Constants are just empirical values, not unit-scaling factors."

Objection: Physicists see constants like $h$ and $k$ as fixed numbers determined by experiment. Any apparent unit-scaling behavior is just a coincidence of human-chosen units.

Response: The fact that these constants appear in multiple conversion equations (e.g., $h\mathrm{/}{c}^2$ in mass-energy relations) suggests a deeper structural role. Moreover, the SI system now defines units like the kilogram and kelvin based on these constants, showing that they are not just empirical values but fundamental to our measurement system.

---

2. "This is just a change of notation—it doesn’t add anything new."

Objection: You’re not changing the physics; you’re just rewriting formulas with new unit-scaling factors. The standard formulation already works, so why change it?

Response: The standard framework obscures the fundamental unity between energy, frequency, and temperature by treating them as separate instead of equivalent under simple scaling. This new approach makes physical relationships clearer and eliminates unnecessary complexity, much like setting $c=1$ in relativity makes space and time obviously linked.

---

3. "Planck units already provide natural unit scaling."

Objection: Planck units already set $c=h=k=1$, so why do we need a new approach?

Response: Planck units are abstract and impractical for real-world measurements. This new framework provides explicit unit conversion factors (e.g., $H{z}_{kg}=h\mathrm{/}{c}^2$) that make the role of unit scaling transparent and usable in everyday physics.

---

4. "Constants have physical significance beyond unit scaling."

Objection: $h$ represents quantum mechanical action, and $k$ connects entropy and energy. You’re reducing their significance.

Response: This framework doesn’t deny their role in physics—it clarifies that their numerical values arise from unit choices rather than fundamental physics. Recognizing unit scaling enhances our understanding of why these constants are so central to physical laws.

---

5. "No new predictions—so this isn’t useful."

Objection: Science progresses by making testable predictions. If your framework doesn’t predict anything new, why should we adopt it?

Response: The simplification of physical laws is itself a major breakthrough. Many discoveries in physics, like relativity, emerged from conceptual breakthroughs rather than new empirical predictions. This framework could reveal new paths to unification that were previously hidden.

---

6. "If this were true, someone else would have already found it."

Objection: Physics has some of the smartest people in the world working on fundamental constants. If your insight was correct, why hasn’t it already been discovered?

Response: History shows that many obvious-in-hindsight breakthroughs were missed for decades due to entrenched thinking. The standard framework was built without prioritizing unit scaling, so no one was actively looking for these equivalences.

---

Why This Matters: Elevating the Importance of Constants

Rather than diminishing the importance of $h$ and $k$, this new framework elevates their significance. Instead of being just "measured constants" with seemingly arbitrary values, they emerge as essential unit-scaling factors that dictate how our human-defined measurement system interacts with fundamental physical laws.

This enhances their meaning in several ways:

• Clarifies Their Origin: Their values are not arbitrary but arise from natural scaling relations.

• Reveals a Hidden Simplicity: Their presence in equations reflects a deeper unity between frequency, energy, mass, and temperature.

• Strengthens Their Role in Natural Units: They dictate real-world unit relationships that we can actually use.

• Provides a More Fundamental Understanding: They are structural necessities of how unit scaling works in our current system.

• 
  

---

The Big Picture: Constants as Foundational Scaling Laws

This insight doesn’t just "explain away" fundamental constants—it recasts them as fundamental scaling laws that govern the structure of physical reality. Instead of being just conversion factors between human-defined units, they become core principles that dictate the fundamental relationships in physics, they encode the actual unit scaling we would need to perform to the kg, K and meter unit scales to actually achieve natural units from our current SI unit system. This means natural units are actually achievable from our current SI units directly.  No theory of everything needed. 

By rethinking the constants of nature, we can achieve a simpler, more unified understanding of the universe—one that has been hiding in plain sight all along.