And he still has not done the calculations required to determine the effect of the non-constancy of c on other parameters and to ensure his model does not predict spectacular and catastrophic events.
There are multiple c's:
Setterfield is changing cEM, but he hasn't derived new functions to determine how this effects the other c's.
"We see from this example that when a constant becomes a dynamical field, we need to derive new equations of evolution. In particular a new equation describing the propagation of the new degree of freedom of the theory will have to be obtained. The best way to construct such a theory is to build a Lagrangian with a corresponding new degree of freedom included ab initio and derive field equations by means of a standard Lagrangian variation. In particular, such a formulation allows us (1) to determine the true degrees of freedom, (2) to check if there exists negative energies or acausal propagation of some modes in the theory, (3) to give a complete and self-consistent description of the dynamics by providing the dynamical equation for the new variable, and (4) to give a clear specification of what we call the stress-energy tensor (For instance, the example of the Appendix resulted in the appearance of both Tmn and T˜mn , whose physical meaning is now ambiguous, and it is very important not to decide a priori what we call energy, for example.) In addition, we can check if the equations are consistent, which will follow if they are all derived from the same Lagrangian by the standard universal method, which extremizes the specified Lagrangian under all small variations (in contrast to Refs. 7–10, where nonstandard variation schemes were used)."
Ellis, George; Uzan, Jean-Philippe. "c is the speed of light, isn't it?" Am. J. Phys. 73 (3), March 2005, 240-247.
Of the multiple VSL cosmologies that have been proposed, none so far have satisfied these calculations.
Other whacky problems that can occur with VSL cosmologies are particles or primordial black holes with horizons that balloon to become their own universes or universes in which entropy runs backwards. Setterfield has not done the calculations to make sure that his cosmology does not contain these anomalies.
cEM = the electromagnetism constant (speed of light in a vacuum)
cST = the spacetime constant (the actual c in E = mc^2)
cGW = the speed of gravitational waves in a vacuum--typically cGW = cST according to general relativity, and if we change the value of c this relationship may change.
cE = the Einstein space-matter constant, which is equal to cST by general relativity, but will not be if c is changed.
Setterfield is changing cEM, but he hasn't derived new functions to determine how this effects the other c's.
Setterfield addresses c in E=mc2 and the gravitational wave propagation must be instantaneous or the planetary orbits are disturbed (you do realize that the earth orbits the instantaneous center of gravity of the sun, right?)
As for cE, Setterfield has addressed E with hc and cST is addressed with his discussion of problems with spacetime expansion in general.
Other whacky problems that can occur with VSL cosmologies are particles or primordial black holes with horizons that balloon to become their own universes or universes in which entropy runs backwards. Setterfield has not done the calculations to make sure that his cosmology does not contain these anomalies.
Well, we have supposed singularities ballooning into universes under current models and you don't see that as 'whacky'? I sure do. IMO, what is 'whacky' is purely in the eye of the beholder.