Show me how c, the speed of light, is not constant with time and I’ll concede the whole argument. Experimental verification. Show it. Not possibles. Not could bes. Where’s the data?
Because if c changes w.r.t time (not medium but age of universe), the mu naught and episilon naught change. Fundamental constants of the universe as we know it. The only possible way I’ve seen is the primordial universal soup very, very, close to Big Bang. When the forces were still together. Most anyway. But colliders haven’t shown this as of yet. It’s still a “maybe.”
Back it up, Cowboy. ;) Because if you can show this is observable, then the can of worms you’ve opened includes all you say. Until then,.........
You show me how c has been constant over the past 10 billion years. Experimental verfication. Show it. Not possibles. Not could bes. Where are the experiments?
You claim to be a published scientist and a reviewer and you ask others to produce data that you yourself can't? Why am I not surprised by such 'scientific' behavior?
"Because if c changes w.r.t time (not medium but age of universe), the mu naught and episilon naught change. Fundamental constants of the universe as we know it. The only possible way I’ve seen is the primordial universal soup very, very, close to Big Bang. When the forces were still together. Most anyway. But colliders haven’t shown this as of yet. It’s still a “maybe.”
You could have looked at Setterfield's work like I had suggested and you would know the answer. But you didn't. Here's one example (Ctrl F for "permittivity") and there are plenty of other articles where Setterfield deals with this (Ctrl F for "permittivity" on his site).
"Back it up, Cowboy. ;) Because if you can show this is observable, then the can of worms you’ve opened includes all you say. Until then,........."
OK Cowboy. ;-) If you can show that a constant c is experimentially observable over the past 10 billion years, then the can of worms you've opened includes all you say.
Until then, all you've shown is the typical 'scientific' tactic of requiring your opponent to produce data that you yourself can't.