There have also been variations in
the measured height of Mount Everest, including some in recent years.
If we take Sheldrake's 'argument' at face value, we would have to
assume that the mountain is actually growing and shrinking, rather than this being a measurement issue, exacerbated by the difficulties of the measurement, and the different (and potentially unknown) errors introduced by different methods (GPS versus trigonometry).
Might be the case. But, there are practical and logistical issues involved in getting an exact and regularly testable measurement of the height of Everest. I don’t think Metrologists have that same problem. Also, the speed of light is now apparently fixed by definition, as opposed to gravitational force which is, according to Sheldrake anyway, regularly measured and the various measurements are then averaged out periodically. Not knowing much about the physical sciences, I’d like some different views on this from people who do, which is why I posted this question.
There are some assumptions underlying the question; firstly, whatever you think of Sheldrake’s ideas, he is an accomplished academic, so I am assuming that he hasn’t simply invented his sources. That doesn’t mean that he is right in whatever he asserts by any means, but it does mean that there is more to what he is saying than some simple error over data or understanding of measurements.
Secondly, and similarly, I don’t have a science background but I have studied other disciplines enough to know that an overall theory in any subject isn’t easily dismissed with some scrap of data or an out of context idea. If you know a particular subject, you’ll know (I mean anyone will know, this isn’t directed at you) that you need a broad knowledge of it to really appreciate and counter a new or different idea.
So, while I’m not saying that Sheldrake is right, I have no idea if he is or not, I’m interested in hearing arguments that address what he is saying from that standpoint.
Nb there have been some changes, very small changes in the height of Mt Everest due to a ‘relaxing of the tectonic plates’. All mountain ranges are either slowly moving upwards or slowly sinking I think, due to ongoing shifts in the earths surface. Very small changes, but still changes. The official height used currently is from 1955 (or it was last time I read about it) and there are reasons to think it might not be exact. Measurements from satellite are simpler now but not totally straightforward and error free.