Asri-unix.926 net.space utcsrgv!utzoo!decvax!ucbvax!C70:sri-unix!JPM@SU-AI Tue Mar 9 05:50:37 1982 Variable C I saw the calculations in either a Science News or Scientific American article several years ago. I am sure someone can be more specific. Basically the argument goes as follows. The background radiation is so low because the frontier of the universe is expanding, implying a massive redshift of all energies from the big bang. But this redshift is NOT equal in all directions. Rather, some directions are decidedly "hotter" than others. The pattern is such to suggest that we are moving at about 300 mps towards the "hot" spot. ie that there is a frame of reference in which we are moving which, if any frame of reference can, is an "absolute" frame of reference. As to claims that "there are no absolute frames of reference because all physical laws are invariant," bull. We do NOT know that physical laws are invariant. We know that SOME physical laws are invariant for a LOCAL area of space at a CERTAIN period of time. We have not even shown that EM force is indeed inverse square over large distances (all experiments have been over short distances that have any reasonable degree of accuracy). It SHOULD be inverse square, and I would bet on it, but it is a DEDUCTION, not a directly observed fact (ie one that depends only upon the correctness of a simple detection mechanism). We don't know half of what we do know. (yes, that is recursive) Jim ----------------------------------------------------------------- gopher://quux.org/ conversion by John Goerzen of http://communication.ucsd.edu/A-News/ This Usenet Oldnews Archive article may be copied and distributed freely, provided: 1. There is no money collected for the text(s) of the articles. 2. The following notice remains appended to each copy: The Usenet Oldnews Archive: Compilation Copyright (C) 1981, 1996 Bruce Jones, Henry Spencer, David Wiseman.