I agree. If the photon did behave in an erratic way you would be able to say
that the photon is behaving erratic and not the laws of physics that make
your instruments work. But in this hypothetical case you would use some
other way to relate time to space. This relation also has to involve a
const
> If a ''variable speed of light theory'' is confirmed by experiment, it is
> still a matter of convention to say that the light speed has
> changed and not
> some other dimensional constant. Only dimensionless combinations of
> constants can be said to have changed independent of conventions.
>
Questioning whether the speed of light has changed within a certain class of
theories is nonsense and this is not an opinion but an elementary
mathematical fact. Of course, one may e.g. question whether photons are
massive and whether this mass has changed, leading to a (wavelength
dependent) chang
With respect, I think it was Dawkins in the Blind watchmaker who quipped
"your incredulity alone is no measure of reality" (I paraphrase..)
You may well be correct that the speed of light is and has "always" been
constant, but this remains a point of some controversy that only continued
scientific
4 matches
Mail list logo
