Now, I think the most important implication of this idea, at least in terms of interpreting cosmological observations, is that “space” (or the amount of nothingness that defines the one) would be constant. So, for instance, the redshift observations often cited to support the theory that the universe is expanding ...would have to be reinterpreted with the apparent increases in the areas between various groupings of material being viewed in deference to the postulate that those areas are nonetheless constant. “How could this be?”, one may well ask. Simple. In line with my theory, space isn’t expanding; the universe is contracting (or perhaps more properly, rewinding itself) in relation to space. Another analogy: think of two stationary balls of twine that are both directly connected to a third (albeit unseen) ball. If one were to wind the hidden ball, the visible balls would shrink in accordance to the amount of material being pulled away from each of them. So, as the hidden ball grows larger, the area between the others would seem to be increasing, when what’s really happening is that the respective sizes of the visible balls are decreasing in a constant space. I believe this is essentially what's happening everywhere in the cosmos, and that it’s only a matter of time before the ‘hidden ball’ (the ultimate re-collector) becomes “visible” (if only by virtue of its effects) from nearly any point of view in the universe.

Теория сжатия Вселенной, не смотря на такое массированное и организованное сопротивление, несмотря на такое охаивание, найдет свое место в науке. Ключевые эксперименты, рано, или поздно будут проведены, все поймут, кто был кто на самом деле. Научный подход, будет снова использоваться. Единственное, что может произойти плохого, это, - слишком запоздавшее прозрение. Дело в том, что кроме доказывающих экспериментов, нужно проводить ряд других, ведущих к развитию теории, к получению прикладных результатов, к появлению новых технологий. Если опоздать лет на 15 – 20, то никаких усилий не хватит, нейтрализовать наступающий всеобщий кризис человечества. Эксперименты, по развитию технологий будут уже не нужны. Речь будет идти только о простом выживании каждого отдельного индивидуума. Ресурсов хватит, только для выживания небольшой популяции людей. Это всеобщая война за выживание, и никакой науки. Выжившие, может быть, через тысячелетия попытаются возродить науки, а может быть, им уже никогда не удастся вернутся к такому развитию, как ныне. Это будет объективное требование вымирания всей популяции людей, и никакие случайности тут не помогут. Вот какие перспективы вы готовите своим внукам и правнукам, господа «ученые».

Герберт Уэллс. Машина времени
Не оставалось сомнения, что удивительная красота виденных мною зданий была результатом последних усилий
человечества перед тем, как оно достигло полной гармонии жизни....
Такова неизбежная судьба всякой энергии. Достигнув своей конечной цели, она еще ищет выхода в искусстве, в любви, а затем наступает бессилие и упадок.

Abstract
The perfect fluid in the context of a covariant variable speed of light theory proposed by J. Magueijo is studied. On the one hand the modified first law of thermodynamics together with a recipe to obtain equations of state are obtained. On the other hand the Newtonian limit is performed to obtain the nonrelativistic hydrostatic equilibrium equation for the theory. The results obtained are used to determine the time variation of the radius of Mercury induced by the variability of the speed of light (c), and the scalar contribution to the luminosity of white dwarfs. Using a bound for the change of that radius and combining it with an upper limit for the variation of the fine structure constant, a bound on the time variation of c is set. An independent bound is obtained from luminosity estimates for Stein 2015B.
....
The conclusive result is that bound for c/c

0 ± 2 1012 y1

Сейчас ваше поведение изменилось, и каких то новых мыслей вы мне не приносите, благодарить не за что.

Apart from the mathematical consistency of the VSL approach, there is another fundamental issue to be addressed. If c c(t) everywhere in the theory, how could we tell? Since our rulers and clocks are all affected by the change, why does not everything cancel out, relegating VSL-type approaches to being physically meaningless changes in the system of units? In [307] it is properly pointed out that it is only through changes in dimensionless numbers that any physical effect could be detected. It is common to phrase the discussion in terms of the fine structure constant



Unfortunately, if one chooses as the relevant probe, it is difficult, if not impossible, to distinguish a variable speed of light from a variable Planck constant, a variable electric charge, or a variation in the permeability of the vacuum. Proposal From the former discussion it should now be clear that if one wants to uniquely specify that it is the speed of light that is varying, then one should seek a theory that contains two natural speed parameters, call them cphoton and cgravity ( cgravity is the speed at which small gravitational disturbances propagate), and then ask that the ratio of these two speeds is a time dependent quantity.

We now must ask: if the cosmic redshift is not due to changes in c, how does Setterfield explain it? In his early work, Setterfield apparently did claim that c-decay was the direct cause of the redshift.{13} More recently, he has made written comments that make it look as though he still holds such a view.{14,15} But he elsewhere describes the redshift as being due to a change in the intrinsic properties of atoms in the early years of the cosmos, rather than being directly caused by the c-decay.{16,17,18} We believe this is Setterfield’s current explanation for cosmological redshifts, in view of his statementlike: “The redshift and variable light speed are separate manifestations of a basic cosmological effect. One does not directly cause the other, but both are caused by the increase in the energy density of{19} His most recent writings support this interpretation.{20} This notion goes beyond the simple increase in atomic frequencies posited in Equation (5), and to understand it we must look at Setterfield’s model in more detail. Setterfield believes that, when the heavens were “stretched out,” God filled the Universe with extremely tiny particles called Planck Particle Pairs (PPPs), which, being positive or negative, can be created in “ionization” processes or undergo recombination, causing them to disappear. The annihilation of PPPs adds to the Universe’s Zero Point Energy (ZPE) content. The enormous energy present in the ZPE causes the rapid creation and annihilation of virtual particles. It is the interaction of photons with the virtual particles that causes c-decay; since the number of these particles increases with time, the speed of light supposedly decreases as a function of time. Increase in ZPE also allegedly causes electrons to increase in size, which leads to a discontinuous decrease in electron mass during “quantum jumps,”

Вася, как смотришь на эти цитаты про вариабельную скорость света, прикалываешься ли или да?

One can ask whether the previous Section's constant-variations could be caused by a time-varying speed of light: c = c(t). We refer to Berman (2007a) for information on the experimental time variability of . Gomide (1976) has studied c(t) and in such a case, which was later revived by Barrow (1998a,b,1997); Barrow Magueijo (1999); Albrecht Magueijo (1999); Bekenstein (1982). This could explain also the supernovae observations. We refer to their papers for further information. Our framework now will be an estimate made through Berman's GLNH.

Написаны все-таки прилично, грамотно, в отличие от того, как впитер корежит математику

Так и я о чем - написаны учеными традиционной ориентации, а не через ***у

Matti Pitkanen: Making it clear what one means with speed of light is essential. In general relativity one cannot speak of varying speed of light. The challenge of VSL theorists is to define operationally what they mean with the velocity of light and how GRT should be modified.

For instance, VSL makes sense in “sub-manifold gravity” with many-sheeted space-time identified as a 4-surface in say H=M^4xCP_2. Consider two space-time sheets and travel of topologically condensed photons (particle like topological inhomogenities that I have christened CP_2 type extremals) along them. The lightlike geodesics are with respect to the induced metric and the time taken to travel from A to B depends on space-time sheet. Travelling along very wiggly space-time surface takes much longer time than along canonically imbedded M^4. Warped imbeddings of M^4 represent the simplest example of reduction of velocity of light in this sense. Also anomalously large time dilation in absence of gravitational fields is predicted for them.

Geometrically this means that the paths of photons are in general time-like as curves of the imbedding space and one can even have a situation in which photon does not move at all in M^4 but rotates in CP_2 degrees of freedom with velocity of light. As a matter fact, classical description of Higgs mechanism for fermions is based on this kind of zitterbewegung for CP_2 type extremals having random light like curve as M^4 projection.

Abstract: We consider the effect of the varying speed of light theory on nonrotating black holes. We show that in any varying-c theory, the Schwarzschild solution is neither static nor stationary. For a no-charged black hole, the singularity in the Schwarzschild horizon cannot be removed by coordinate transformation. Hence, no matter can enter the horizon, and the interior part of the black hole is separated from the rest of the Universe. If c 0, then the size of the Schwarzschild radius increases with time. The higher value of the speed of light in the very early Universe may have caused a large reduction in the probability of the creation of the primordial black holes and their population. The same analogy is also considered for charged black holes.

Альфа непостоянная или как, а впитер?

Hossein Shojaie and Mehrdad Farhoudi. Black holes in the varying speed of light theory написал(а):Abstract: We consider the effect of the varying speed of light theory on nonrotating black holes. We show that in any varying-c theory, the Schwarzschild solution is neither static nor stationary. For a no-charged black hole, the singularity in the Schwarzschild horizon cannot be removed by coordinate transformation. Hence, no matter can enter the horizon, and the interior part of the black hole is separated from the rest of the Universe. If c 0, then the size of the Schwarzschild radius increases with time. The higher value of the speed of light in the very early Universe may have caused a large reduction in the probability of the creation of the primordial black holes and their population. The same analogy is also considered for charged black holes.

Почему должна?

нельзя менять скорость света, не меняя геометрии пространства

wpiter написал(а):нельзя менять скорость света, не меняя геометрии пространстваПочему?

нельзя менять скорость света, не меняя геометрии пространства

С**2/a=S

Я конструирую размеры, или масштабы, да и вообще все пространство

В начале сотворил wpiter небо и землю. Земля же была безвидна и пуста, и тьма над бездною, и 1-2-3 носился над водою.
И сказал wpiter : да будет свет. И стал свет.
И увидел wpiter свет, что он хорош, и замедлил его.

непостоянна

Как выглядит пространство Минковского с постоянной скоростью света знаем, а какая геометрия у меняющейся скорости света? Такую геометрию пока как-будто не изобрели.