Re: We know we don't know
That's not really true though.
You have 1000 papers peer reviewed forming a chain of knowledge.
There is a dumb thing at paper 500 that everyone knew at the time was a dumb placeholder, but the problems with it were ignored.
But 500 teams have built on that flaw.
It is impossible then to fix that problem because 500 teams work would need to be wrong for 1 teams work to be right.
Instead a sort of mysticism builds up so that those 500 papers are based more on faith than reality.
As the contradictory evidence grows, so the faith becomes stronger, the need for those 500 teams to save 'science' gets stronger and stronger. They believe more. More denial. More faith!
"and suddenly thought that the light speed limit only applied to the visible universe"
A magic constant that is universe wide?
n [space units] per [time unit]
But if space is stretched then so is matter, so measure it against matter will always get the same result if the matter and the light are in the same local space, even if space is stretch. We already know space isn't even and uniform. Yet the constant remains.
So now we remove the space unit, we have n per [time unit]
So lets set out time unit as 1.
Light comes from matter (e.g. an electron drops a shell or two and emits a photon), so the speed of light must be linked to the speed of that process. The two things are linked somehow.
Speed up time and we speed up matter.
Light travels ~1 [something] per matter's motion of ~0 [something].
i.e. All matter is close to local 'stationary', ~0, all light is close to some ~1 relative to that matter. So whatever could an electro magnetic wave be travelling over? Something that has 0 and 1, more damn integers?
One might wonder.
So now our magic constant isn't magic or a constant, its just a constant ratio relative to our measurement. If we measured light in one context relative to another, we'd get a different result.
So do we ever measure light at a different velocity? Well, yes when it goes through glass, we measure it from the outside of the glass. Is it in a different matter context to the one we are measuring from? The light is inside the glass, and we are outside. So why is the ~1 unit in that 'glass' matter context different than the ~1 unit in our 'air' context?
And then there's the straight line.
If our space is more dense on the left than on the right, then light swings to the left.
And so does matter moving over the same field.
"straight" is whatever direction the light takes, but only for the matter moving the same as the light. To an outside observer it moves according to the medium it is travelling through. But then we know this right? Its' literally the basis of everyday lenses. We literally see it change direction as it moves from one local field to the next, as long as we're outside one of those fields.
So, are there multiple paths across space that would go from A to B taking a different number of N units of time? i.e. smeering out the event over time?
Well their *could* be, because we do that with lenses, light can take two paths and end up at the same place at different times. But to suppose that for space you have to think space you'd have to see space as not uniform or even. For that you'd have to be outside it, like being outside the lens as the light passes through it.