Light is a particle. The particle does not degrade over time. Light is light. Or is it E=MC2 unless the light has travelled over a billion miles, then it E=MC?

>Hi,
>4 hours over 1/2 a billion years isn't a great deal of difference. Also, wouldn't half a billion years be sufficient time for the radiation to stop or significantly slow.
>
>>>>But in my theory, light that has traveled hundreds of millions of years acts different, and doesn't fit on the same EM spectrum as fresh locally emitted light.
>>>>
>>>>It suggests that frequency can drop in really old light, and the wavelength does NOT go up.
>>>
>>>How would that be possible? The speed of ANY wave - not only EM waves - must always be the product of wavelength * frequency. This is not advanced math, but simple geometrical reasoning. You can't circumvent that.
>>
>>
>>Sure you can.
>>
>>Wavelength and frequency are classical concepts.
>>
>>My code constitutes a very non-classical physics.
>>
>>Remember the wave-particle duality?
>>
>>EM "waves" are different than sound waves or ocean waves, or anything like that.
>>
>>
>>> For example, if light goes at 300,000 km/sec, and the frequency is one second, you'll have one wave crest every 300,000 km, since that is the distance the previous wave crest advanced in one second.
>>>
>>>Nor have countless experiments produced any evidence that light goes at any speed but "c".
>>
>>How about this:
>>
>>"Delayed gamma rays from deep space may provide the first evidence for physics beyond current theories."
>>
>>http://www.physorg.com/news110480559.html
>>
>>It seems to corroborate my hypothesis.
>>
>>
>>
>>>>If anyone can think of a way to test that, it would be pretty good proof.
>>>
>>>It should be possible, in principle, to shine a laser from the moon, or perhaps from a spacecraft further away, and measure any change in frequency. But I guess that first there would have to be a sound theory to justify such an experiment.
>>
>>We need to test it at distances where Hubble redshift is observed, hundreds of millions of light years.
>>
>>An experiment that involved us emitting the light would have to take hundreds of millions of years to complete.
>>
>>That's not going to work.