2003-05-01 It is of a curiosity to me why in the measure of the Speed of light, distal measures from places like Jupiter’s eclipses, it is assumed that the light has traveled in a “straight” line, @ C. The reason that I would question, is, in part, because of the incessant reminders from the writers, in these forums, of the fact of gravity curving space time . Would it not be that light passing Jupiter would have imparted to it C + x/C = velocity, where x is the value(s) of acceleration, due to spin rate, gravitation, and relative motion, with a resultant negation/relitivisation of all of the same factor(s), upon the final velocity, (at site of reception) as to give the appearance of having traveled, in a “Straight” line @ C, but that the factors of differentiation, of the velocity factors that, would otherwise be presented as C + C, work out, with the curvatures of space time, as to have presented us with an appearance of Always traveling at C, even thought the reality is such that, it underwent the acceleration and deceleration curvature of space time in such a fashion as to always present an appearance of a straight line speed of C . IN geometry, no geometer has ever been able to prove the existence of a “straight” line, that is because they do NOT exist anywhere other then in your mind. It is accepted, and known, that it is simply a series of points. Let’s start “assuming” that they all curve, such that we “assume” the truth, not imagine an imaginary, hence false, solution. Both, Janus, and Hurkly, helped me in the understanding of the (verbal) differentiation of Speed and Velocity. As a furthered proof of something, some of the Gravity work, I needed a flashlight, anybody seen my flashlight?