Adam Crowl wrote:
>
> Hi ASA
>
> Dick, I think you might've over-reacted. I don't think Jim's espousing
> Setterfield lunacy. Some research does indicate a higher velocity for c in
> the far, far past during the very hot and tiny phase of the Big Bang. By the
> time nucleii had formed it was down to its current value.
What is this research? The claim is a bit puzzling since if relativity
is correct, c is simply a conversion factor between two units (km & sec) for measuring
intervals, so that having it change would be a little like the number of feet in a
mile changing.
(As I think I've noted before: Relativity does _not_ actually require
that light travel at speed c & if photons have a rest mass it won't. But that
wouldn't have any effect that I can think of in the early universe.)
Shalom,
George
George L. Murphy
gmurphy@raex.com
http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Jan 12 2000 - 07:27:48 EST