There is a need for a demonstratable force capable of producing the distribution of matter in the universe (they are still in motion)
Are you advocating a naturalistic cause for this "distribution"?
...and a force that can account for Gravity effects... A force that cannot be directly detected itself and acts asymmetrically..( and I would argue account for a Grav feild stronger in the past)... A vibration in a Aether of plank density could do all those things and the things observed and would travel at something on the order of 10-44 secs
You have quoted a time, not a velocity.
.....far far faster then light regardless of any other criteria you choose to use or omit........... so that issue may be moot...
I don't moot so.
Neville.
Neville Jones <njones@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Do you (or anyone else for that matter) see a need for anything traveling faster than
light?
Neville
