[xersanozgen (OP)]

Do you want to be more clever than Einstein?

This is possible. .

Sure.

OK. Very easy; here the clues:

1- Light Kinematics has 6 main factors; when the few of them are ignored, some post-truth hypotheses can be emerged like SR.

2- A link for more (only 3 pages): http://vixra.org/abs/1903.0044

3- Never mind the relativity method; directly use outer space as a common reference frame for the motion relation of a photon and its source.

[Kryptid]

3- Never mind the relativity method; directly use outer space as a common reference frame for the motion relation of a photon and its source.

The problem with that is that "outer space" looks different depending on the observer.

[Bored chemist]

Please explain exactly what you think this means

We human arrived energy based paradigm instead of material based physics.

[Bored chemist]

2- A link for more (only 3 pages): http://vixra.org/abs/1903.0044

And... what it says is
"Comments: 4 Pages. ...".

You are so wrong you can't even count to 4.

Why on Earth would we pay you any attention.

[Bored chemist]

- Never mind the relativity method; directly use outer space as a common reference frame for the motion relation of a photon and its source.

If I use relativity I get the answer that agrees with what I actually observe.

Why would I chose to use  any system that gives the WRONG answer?

[xersanozgen (OP)]

 It may be useful to remember Einstein’s explanation about Lorentz transforms (Einstein,A., Relativity, the special and the general relativity, 1916 section 11):

K : Reference frame
K’: Moving frame (It is accepted as an inertial reference frame because of its uniform motion)

 

[xersanozgen (OP)]

 K : Reference frame
K’: Moving frame (It is accepted as an inertial reference frame because of its uniform motion)

K and K’ are on the point O at the moment To.
An identified photon (Pı) and K’ frame begin their travelings at the moment To.
At the moment Tı, Photon Pı has arrived to the point B; K’ frame has arrived to the point A.
Einstein write the coordinates of the photon Pı  for K (x; y; z; t) and K’: (x’; y’; z’; t’)

For K:    x = ct ;  y = 0 ; z = 0 and t     
For K’:  x’ = ct’; y’ = 0 ; z’ =0 and t’

Thus far, everything is normal. If we want, we may indicate the coordinates according to other points/frames. The photon Pı is a unique object by its existence.



According to SR,  a person in K’ frame cannot know his relative motion and he considers the value of light as ‘ c ‘; because he will find this value on measuring. In this case the coordinates  of Pı will be x’ = ct' and t’ for him.  the relation of  x' / t' = c  is inevitabl; because he (K') will measure the value ' c ' always.


please look at the figure :

Now; SR steps in the event:

The outer observer (in K) decides that the coordinates of the photon Pı would be
x’ = c.t’ = (ct – vt) and t’ according to the frame K’ (*). And he would find new transform equations for providing that relation:   x’ / t’ = c

It is interesting;  How will the photon’s  way be decreased  due to relative speed of the frame K’ ? Especially in space/vacuum environment.

SR mentality found a solution this problem by using a train or rigid steak for K’ frame !?****



 
(*) Whereas the Photon Pı and the point K’ move away together from the point O and the photon Pı had actually traveled the way OB for the duration t. Lorentz, Poincaré and Einstein analyzed the photography that was taked at the moment Tı ; they had neglected the continuousness of events. They prefered an instantanous picture. But we can distinguish  the natural reality. We know the photon Pı traveled the way OB in the duration  t = (Tı – To) not the distance AB.

[xersanozgen (OP)]

The same thing happened again. An avoidance attitude for the basic essence of SR (figure was downloaded 2 times). In publications, high comments on the inferences, expansions, examples and foamings  are the level of  95%, but the first technical base  is 5%.

Yet it is quite simple / easy; no need to be an authority. Let's activate the cognitive self-confidence and look at the event together:

At the moment To, the source / obturator and  the photon start  their journeys.

At the moment Tı,  the source reaches point A, the photon reaches point B. That's all. They go parallel in the common K system. (Please allegorize like a film or in four dimensions)

The external observer thinks that the person in K' will measure the speed of light as ‘c;  It wouldn't be a problem if it was measured as c-v.

[Bored chemist]

Quick question; Do you understand that, in every test that has ever been done, GR gives the correct answer?

[xersanozgen (OP)]

Quick question; Do you understand that, in every test that has ever been done, GR gives the correct answer?

 

No problem for you.

[Bored chemist]

Quick question; Do you understand that, in every test that has ever been done, GR gives the correct answer?

Specifically, it's a question to which I'd like an answer- either yes or no.

[xersanozgen (OP)]

Quick question; Do you understand that, in every test that has ever been done, GR gives the correct answer?

Specifically, it's a question to which I'd like an answer- either yes or no.

Gravity can bend  the light's path.

GR accepts that the gravity and acceleration are equivalent; and GR claims that light's path is bended because of accelerating of a chest/cabinet. I indicated that the light path is bended again when the value of acceleration is zero (fixed speed) according to GR mentality. Because GR mentality supposes the form of path by allegorizing the source and final point of light.

Whereas, an alternative interpretation is possible in accodance with LCS concept: I attached the figure again.

Single photon's path is horizontal (right figure); the cabinet goes up with its fixed or accelerated speed. Please consider that the photon is sent to perpendicular  direction of the wall by a perforated filter or obturator.

The path of sequential photons is different (please look at:

https://www.academia.edu/36057326/The_Path_of_Light_on_a_Moving_Body

 

[Bored chemist]

Quick question; Do you understand that, in every test that has ever been done, GR gives the correct answer?

Specifically, it's a question to which I'd like an answer- either yes or no.

[Bored chemist]

Also, please note.

"obturator
/ˈɒbtjʊəreɪtə/

noun ANATOMY
either of two muscles covering the outer front part of the pelvis on each side and involved in movements of the thigh and hip."

from Google's dictionary

[Kryptid]

Quick question; Do you understand that, in every test that has ever been done, GR gives the correct answer?

Specifically, it's a question to which I'd like an answer- either yes or no.

I'd like to know the answer to this too.

[xersanozgen (OP)]

Also, please note.

"obturator"
 

Sorry; you are right. It would must be "obstructor filter" . Thanks for your warning.

Perhaps, I would must use the word "photo-flash" for smallest photon packet.

[xersanozgen (OP)]

Quick question; Do you understand that, in every test that has ever been done, GR gives the correct answer?

Specifically, it's a question to which I'd like an answer- either yes or no.

I'd like to know the answer to this too.

Probably, you claims that the tests of GR verifies/protects the SR.

 The quick answer for popular science readers is "YES". 

This "YES" is sufficient for amateur science interests.

In my opinion, naked scientists must not confine himself to this "yes".

A comparing material for Muon lifetime is inevitable. If not, you cannot know/detect the increasing of natural muons' lifetime; and attetion for that point: the speeds of natural muons and lab. mouns (comparison material) are a big fraction of c; as if, they are equal. So this reality cannot explain the effect of SR. Sometimes, scientific articles may include similar wrong interpretation ( e.g. please remember the Cold fusion case in Nature Journals) . No problem for people who convinced.

However, publicated articles are sufficient for people who wants to believe. Nobody gets upset. SR is already a publicated article. Why do we discuss?

The forum policy may forbid to discuss SR and GR like a religion or basic law. And I'll be enlightened that the date is early yet for new alternative theories, advanced horizontals about light kinematics and cosmology.

 

 

[Kryptid]

Probably, you claims that the tests of GR verifies/protects the SR.

Special relativity has passed all of its tests as well, even without general relativity needing to be considered. The speed of light in a vacuum has been measured as being invariant in all reference frames, which is exactly what special relativity predicts. E=mc² is a direct consequence of special relativity and has been measured to be correct to extreme precision:

Both E=mc² and speed of light invariance are good evidence for the accuracy of special relativity. Time dilation and length contraction follow inevitably from speed of light invariance. The only way that the speed of light can be invariant in all reference frames is if space and time change in such a way that any attempt to measure the speed of light will come up with the same value.

In my opinion, naked scientists must not confine himself to this "yes".

They don't. If sufficient experimental evidence against the accuracy of special relativity was acquired some day, then it would be falsified and we could discard it. However, no such thing has happened yet.

A comparing material for Muon lifetime is inevitable. If not, you cannot know/detect the increasing of natural muons' lifetime; and attetion for that point: the speeds of natural muons and lab. mouns (comparison material) are a big fraction of c; as if, they are equal. So this reality cannot explain the effect of SR. Sometimes, scientific articles may include similar wrong interpretation ( e.g. please remember the Cold fusion case in Nature Journals) . No problem for people who convinced.

You keep talking about the muon thing and seem to forget that is far from the only evidence for special relativity. Even if we never knew anything about muons at all, we would still have more than sufficient evidence in favor special relativity's accuracy.

The forum policy may forbid to discuss SR and GR like a religion or basic law. And I'll be enlightened that the date is early yet for new alternative theories, advanced horizontals about light kinematics and cosmology.

Your light kinematics model has been falsified because it predicts results that are at odds with experimental data.

[Bored chemist]

In my opinion, naked scientists must not confine himself to this "yes".

So, in your opinion we should get it wrong.
Why is that?

please remember the Cold fusion case in Nature Journals

Yes, I remember. They published it with a huge disclaimer effectively  saying "we don't really trust this".
And they were right to do so, because it turned out that one bad experiment wasn't enough to overturn science.

It doesn't seem relevant to the current discussion.

The forum policy may forbid to discuss SR and GR like a religion or basic law.

It does nothing of the sort.
It does ask anyone trying to say GR doesn't work to provide evidence.
You didn't

[Bored chemist]

However, publicated articles are sufficient for people who wants to believe. Nobody gets upset. SR is already a publicated article. Why do we discuss?

In your case, you do not discuss.
You just bleat that it's wrong, without giving us any reason to believe you.