Is this Objectivist pseudo science?
Apparently, the Objectivists seem to think otherwise.
From this web site:
http://home.earthlink.net/~marklin/
We have:
"To summarize: what is relative about the theory of
relativity is the standards of measurement. This makes it
incompatible with Objectivism as well as counter-intuitive to the
average non-philosophical observer."
and:
"Many people seem to think that experiments prove that the speed
of light is constant. They do not."
and:
"The Lorentz ether theory (LET) starts out by assuming that
the ether exists and that Maxwell's equations hold in the ether
frame, but not necessarily in any other frame. This implies that
the speed of light is only constant relative to the ether, and is
different if the ether is in motion - just like any other wave
phenomena. Integration is built right in at the very beginning.
The Lorentz contraction and time dilation can be derived as a
consequence of assuming that the structure and mechanism of
ordinary rulers and clocks is determined by electromagnetic
interactions which are affected by motion through the ether. This
leads to the Lorentz transformation formulas and the apparent
constancy of the speed of light (and for experts - the apparent
invariance of Maxwell's equations)."
Well, if the total amount of ether is constant (conserved) and the universe is expanding, the ether density would become less and hence light would slow.
What is your opinion?