The is the best definition I have seen of your posts. Look back over the many threads where we have had discussions. You invariably introduce some new scenario which you claim disproves my scenario and you never address the physics issues as presencted in the original scenario. Hmmmm. No wonder you were able to construct such a good definition. I guess I am less than appropriately impressed to know somebody that can dictate the physics of the universe. Your fiat is not a physics rebuttal of my assertion that invariance is a consequence of frame dependant photon existance due to quantum energy functions.