maybe that means you could run a simulation of the universe without specifying c (just like you don’t have to specify “up/down”); maybe saying the speed of light is twice as big in a direction than the other is like saying everything is twice as big as we thought: it’s a meaningless statement because they are defined relative to each other
if universe looks the same in all directions, yet one side of the universe we see as it currently is whereas the other side we see as it was billion of years ago, then it seems reasonable that we would expect both sides to look more different than they actually do. or maybe, it would mean there’s a big bang wave rapidly propagating in the direction where we’re receiving the instantaneous light, which would explain why we see cosmic background radiation from that direction as well
topic: fundamental physics
x-post from YouTube
comments on Why No One Has Measured The Speed Of Light
2 thoughts
maybe that means you could run a simulation of the universe without specifying c (just like you don’t have to specify “up/down”); maybe saying the speed of light is twice as big in a direction than the other is like saying everything is twice as big as we thought: it’s a meaningless statement because they are defined relative to each other
if universe looks the same in all directions, yet one side of the universe we see as it currently is whereas the other side we see as it was billion of years ago, then it seems reasonable that we would expect both sides to look more different than they actually do. or maybe, it would mean there’s a big bang wave rapidly propagating in the direction where we’re receiving the instantaneous light, which would explain why we see cosmic background radiation from that direction as well