Re: Relativistic aberration

W dniu 17.07.2024 o 14:05, gharnagel pisze:

On Wed, 17 Jul 2024 7:05:15 +0000, Thomas Heger wrote:

>
Am Dienstag000016, 16.07.2024 um 16:47 schrieb gharnagel:

>
"Why is the speed of light so slow when the universe is such a really,
really big place?" -- G. L. Harnagel

>
This is a tautology:
>
What we see in the night sky is actually our own past light-cone.

 Ah, but if we can develop tachyon astronomy, that will not be true!
 

This means: light is relatively slow for the wastness of the universe,
hence we can see everything only with a certain delay and the further
away, the longer the delay, according to x = c* t
(with x= distance in meters, t = delay in seconds).
>
This 'longer away' is usually measured in light years and the delay in
years.
>
Since the night sky shows only a delayed image of past events, the speed
of light cancels out of the equations and we can put any value into it
and always get a valid picture of the universe.
>
So we only assume, that light moves always with ~300 million meters per
second through the entire universe.
>
But if light would speed up or slow down, we would not be able to
measure this, because we always see the own light cone in the night sky
and c is already embedded into it (for whatever a value c actually has
in outer space).
>
TH

 Ah, but the fine structure constant, which is pertinent to how stars
shine,
includes the speed of light.  That implies that c is the same throughout
space and time, n'est-ce pas?

c is a constant, poor halfbrain. Of course it
is the same. As for the speed of light - even
your idiot guru was unable to stick to such
an absurd for a long time, and his GR shit
had to abandon it