Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!i2pn.org!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: tomyee3@gmail.com (ProkaryoticCaspaseHomolog)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Subject: Re: E =?UTF-8?B?PSAzLzQgbWM/IG9yIEUgPSBtYz8/IFRoZSBmb3Jnb3R0ZW4gSGFzc2Vu?=
 =?UTF-8?B?b2hybCAxOTA1IHdvcmsu?=
Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2024 22:20:18 +0000
Organization: novaBBS
Message-ID: <d4459e69f16a34d89b68e5f2cdcb59a5@www.novabbs.com>
References: <309fb33a3a66f01873fdc890e899a968@www.novabbs.com> <674BCF8E.822@ix.netcom.com> <674CCA90.3DD9@ix.netcom.com> <a89d71ab22cb1e3e279a59fe50ab5ebb@www.novabbs.com> <9f1cd556912a273a8946c77614611242@www.novabbs.com> <8a0014e4135992c8ec7bd3f2f1983164@www.novabbs.com> <d906fde3148d43d339b1663f1127216a@www.novabbs.com> <13877dcc9c6a6f2dd8056d8c05f0c661@www.novabbs.com> <a7d26012926823b22e139af8670cbbe7@www.novabbs.com> <df76d88c3e9729de443afca2c0cf99fa@www.novabbs.com> <2c831e6c7e0103c00fcebe8074fec8db@www.novabbs.com> <7d37d6e841cd1936217b21a5847fc507@www.novabbs.com> <7511bb1b9b748c76df265f91eaaa468a@www.novabbs.com> <67503f94$0$12915$426a74cc@news.free.fr> <3c8abe81804e4c5b6ced7aefae766c7d@www.novabbs.com> <6750b8d4$0$29710$426a74cc@news.free.fr>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="1301042"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="Ooch2ht+q3xfrepY75FKkEEx2SPWDQTvfft66HacveI";
User-Agent: Rocksolid Light
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
X-Rslight-Site: $2y$10$Vj6Zt2VURwpl0TsXjrTLxuzz078G//6ubzzm9xKR9gkUAPrd62HV.
X-Rslight-Posting-User: 504a4e36a1e6a0679da537f565a179f60d7acbd8
Bytes: 2654
Lines: 24

On Wed, 4 Dec 2024 20:17:25 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:

> ProkaryoticCaspaseHomolog <tomyee3@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> The mere fact that theory and over a century of experimental
>> validation have led to the speed of light being adopted as a constant
>> does not invalidate experiments intended to verify to increasing
>> levels of precision the correctness of the assumptions that led to
>> it adoption as a constant.
>
> So you haven't understood what it is all about.
> I rest my case,

You prematurely rest your case.

Since 1983, the speed of light in vacuum has been defined as exactly
equal to 299,792,458 meters per second.

Given this definition, is there any point to conducting experiments
to test whether there are anisotropies in the speed of light due to
Earth's motions in space? Such as these: https://tinyurl.com/8hkry7k3

The definition of the speed of light is such that there can't be.

Right?