From AA, excerpting:
"'When one of the cornerstones of
physics collapses, it's not obvious what
you hang onto and what you discard',
Davies told Reuters."

This is so compelling. The CBB model does not require that any
cornerstone of physics "collapse", any more than relativity required
Newtonian physics to collapse. It simply builds on relativity jsut as
Einstein built upon Newton.

"...It's not obvious what you hang onto
and what you discard."

The very FIRST thing you discard is the 'no medium' / 'space-as-void'
paradigm. That's numero uno.

Davies obviously has been collaborating with Dr.Joao Magueijo et al on
the VSL (varying speed of light) model. They intuitively recognize there
_must_ be a precipitous lightspeed drop across the 'inflation' spike at
the instant of the BB. But being Void-Spacers, they have no concept of
the mechanism causing the drop, namely, a severe density gradient in the
spatial medium across that instant, such as depicted here-
http://community-2.webtv.net/oldcoot...ang/page2.html

Davies' position on the Lorentz invariance is not stated in the article,
but Magueijo is willing to violate the L.invariance (one of the biggest
no-nos in physics) to have his lightspeed drop. But when the _density
gradient in the spatial medium_ is recognized and factored in, there is
no need to violate the L.invariance. You don't have to give up ANY
'cornerstone of physics'. That's the beauty of the CBB model.
oc