More on Lisle's starlight solution

I've heard from a few folks on Lisle's latest ARJ paper on the starlight travel time.  Some were guarded in their assessment, and others thought it was rubbish.  Folk over at sensuouscurmudgeon raise some interesting questions, like how a nonconstant speed of light relates to permittivity and permeability. I would be interested in Lisle's response to that.  As for myself, I'm still trying to wrap my brain around the whole thing.

Then there was the really interesting revelation to me that his idea is not actually new.  It was originally published in an issue of TJ nine years ago, under Lisle's pseudonym at the time, "Robert Newton."

Newton.  2001.  Distant starlight and Genesis: conventions of time measurement. TJ 15(1):80-85. [PDF]

That was followed by considerable discussion (PDF, PDF, PDF), but it should be noted that though Hartnett was initially hostile to the idea, he later seems to have adopted it in his own cosmogony (PDF).

As I said, I'm still trying to get a grip on the implications of his idea.  I'm really not a physicist, and it's taking a while for me to work through it all.  I would definitely be interested in additional feedback from those who've already written, if the old TJ discussions would change their assessments at all.  Also: Jason, if you're reading this, I'm genuinely interested in your response to the Maxwell equation objections.  I suspect it has to do with the shells of conventional time that surround the earth?  So the Maxwell equations work here, but they would be different in the Andromeda galaxy?  Or something?

I'm really not a physicist...

Feedback? Email me at toddcharleswood [at] gmail [dot] com.