On Mar 21, 3:55 pm, "N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)"
wrote:
Dear Michael Helland:

"Michael Helland" wrote in message

...

On Mar 21, 12:33 pm, "N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)"

wrote:
...
So they travel at c at emission, but slower than c
sometime later? This is not observed in the
laboratory, using starlight from rapidly moving
sources. Guess again.

Are you sure?

http://arxiv.org/ftp/astro-ph/papers/0404/0404207.pdf

You cite a paper that was never peer reviewed, and is used
nowhere as a citation. In other words, it proposes but does not
support "new physics". So it is crap.

David A. Smith


This turns up a 1,180 hits:

http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=... &btnG=Search

An entirely new physics would take decades of effort and involve many
many research projects.

It seems pretty obvious signs of things to come are starting to pop
up, unless you're not interested in paying attention.