[renewiltord]

Impossible means it does not happen, not that it does not happen only when we look. Just because we can't see it doesn't mean that it doesn't happen. After all, as the comment I replied to pointed out, other galaxies can have different constants. We have to be humble and admit we just don't know.

[jiggawatts]

The problem with these type of arguments is rigorously defining “we” and “look”.

Turns out that our gaze has no effect on anything and we’re uninteresting squishy bags of mostly water as far as physical processes are concerned.

[renewiltord]

Yeah, but no one has proven that this is impossible so it's still possible. Just like OP comment.

[wizzwizz4]

https://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/2014-03-25

[ezrast]

This seems like a distinction without a difference, since we can never positively categorize any unobserved phenomenon as impossible (vs merely unobservable). To me, it seems ontologically cleaner to treat existence and observability as the same thing. shrug

[renewiltord]

Okay, fine, I'll come clean, I was just making an unfalsifiability joke. The original god-of-the-gapsy comment was the one that got me. Always just out of reach of our verifiability is the magic. Why not all the way out?

[ezrast]

Whelp, looks like I'm today's Poe's Law poster child. ;)