Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site oliven.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxl!houxm!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!tektronix!hplabs!oliveb!olivee!oliven!hawk
From: hawk@oliven.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.origins
Subject: Re: Perhaps probability
Message-ID: <435@oliven.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 31-Aug-84 19:11:44 EDT
Article-I.D.: oliven.435
Posted: Fri Aug 31 19:11:44 1984
Date-Received: Mon, 3-Sep-84 19:34:27 EDT
References: <209@uwmacc.UUCP> <1160@ihuxq.UUCP>
Organization: University of Waikiki
Lines: 23

>And clearly,
>were the speed of light truly variable, *ALL* of post-Newtonian physics
>would have to be thrown out.  Gadzooks--more than that!  Do you know
>how many equations "c" figures into?

Point of Physics, Mr. Chaiman.  

As long as c is the same everywhere, there is not a problem, even if c changes
over a period of time.  Don't hang on to your post-Newtonian physics very hard,
that mistake was made once before.  *IF* c is declining, I would guess that
that gives us a relation between temporal relativity (and I coin the term
carelessly) and general relativity that is in some ways analagous to the
differences between general and special relativity.

As a side note, some scientists have suggested a large numbers theorey,
maintaining continual creation of matter.  It is based on speculations that
noticed that a cerain big number (10**40?) shows up all over the place, and
that perhaps this number is expanding instead of the universe growing.  It is
offered as an alternative to the big-bang theorey.

-- 
   rick                                     (Rick Hawkins @ Olivetti ATC)
[hplabs|zehntel|fortune|ios|tolerant|allegra|tymix]!oliveb!oliven!hawk