Re: >Re: >Design Flaw in the Brain
Glenn Morton (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Tue, 04 Nov 1997 17:57:40 -0600
At 09:13 AM 11/4/97, Moorad Alexanian wrote:
>At 05:59 PM 11/1/97 -0600, Glenn Morton wrote:
>>The fundamental physical method of timing any event in the cosmos is the
>>speed of light. I can show from non-relativistic assumptions that it must
>>have been constant.
>Thank you for your post. I will read it carefully. The constancy of the
>fundamental constants was discussed also in a book by Mehran, I believe (not
>very sure), which I read some years back. I did develop a "theory" for the
>fine structure constant which was published in The Physical Review and my
>expression for the fine structure constant appears in Barrow and Tiplers'
>Anthropic Principle. Of course, I have been away from that topic for some
>time. I am not sure I understand the above statement of "non-relativistic
>assumptions." The constancy of the speed of light is one of Einstein's main
>postulates of relativistic mechanics.
By a nonrelativistic assumption, I wanted to convey the fact that I am not
saying that c is constant because Einstein assumed it to b constant. (But I
mangled saying it pretty badly). Anyway, I wanted to show by direct
observation (or as close as we could get to that) that the data seen at
SN1987a would not be what it is, if c had changed. This is different than
merely saying "Relativity requires a constant c"
Foundation, Fall and Flood