[Jaaanosik (OP)]

The intrinsic magnetic loop of moving charge is being represented by the flywheel.
When the flywheel accelerates in the rest frame there is no flywheel rotation predicted.



When the flywheel accelerates in the moving frames then the rotation is being predicted.
Does the conservation of the angular momentum hold?



No rotation in K frame, K'1 and K'2 rotations but in opposite directions.
The rotation of the plates is absolute.
If the plates rotate clockwise in K'1, then the plates cannot stay without rotation in K or rotate counter clockwise in K'2 frame.
There is going to be only one frame that predicts true proper rotation.

[Jaaanosik (OP)]

The electromagnetic nature of things undresses the relativity.
The relativity is 'naked'.
Is there any 'Einstein' out there to defend it?

[Kryptid]

Is there any 'Einstein' out there to defend it?

No need. We have a lot of observational data to defend it for us.

[Jaaanosik (OP)]

Is there any 'Einstein' out there to defend it?

No need. We have a lot of observational data to defend it for us.

The 21cm hydrogen line observed from space.
How does relativity explains it?
What is the cause of the emission according to relativity?

[Kryptid]

The 21cm hydrogen line observed from space.
How does relativity explains it?
What is the cause of the emission according to relativity?

I think you'll need to consult quantum physics for that answer, not relativity.

[Jaaanosik (OP)]

The 21cm hydrogen line observed from space.
How does relativity explains it?
What is the cause of the emission according to relativity?

I think you'll need to consult quantum physics for that answer, not relativity.

Right, the current relativity does not have explanation for it.

Having said that, if there is a preferred frame than the force between electron and proton varies based on the hydrogen atom speed in the preferred frame as shown in the thought experiment.
When the hydrogen atom slows down in the preferred frame the force is stronger and the electron is pulled to lower energy state. Suddenly 'spontaneous' emission has a cause.
The 'relativity' anchored in the preferred frame can explain the emissions.

The Lamb shift... the same story.

[Kryptid]

Right, the current relativity does not have explanation for it.

It isn't supposed to, not any more than it's supposed to explain why sugar is sweet.

Having said that, if there is a preferred frame than the force between electron and proton varies based on the hydrogen atom speed in the preferred frame as shown in the thought experiment.
When the hydrogen atom slows down in the preferred frame the force is stronger and the electron is pulled to lower energy state. Suddenly 'spontaneous' emission has a cause.
The 'relativity' anchored in the preferred frame can explain the emissions.

There is no preferred frame. The isotropy of the speed of light has been demonstrated to extremely high precision.

[Jaaanosik (OP)]

...

There is no preferred frame. The isotropy of the speed of light has been demonstrated to extremely high precision.

How is speed of light measured?
Are you familiar with this video?

[Kryptid]

The two-way speed of light is good enough to detect anisotropy.

[Jaaanosik (OP)]

The two-way speed of light is good enough to detect anisotropy.

Isotropy is established by definition. There is no experiment to prove it.

[Kryptid]

Isotropy is established by definition.

Only because it was discovered to be true experimentally.

There is no experiment to prove it.

Sure there is. The Michelson-Morley experiment was one, as are more recent optical resonator experiments: https://arxiv.org/abs/1002.1284

[Jaaanosik (OP)]

Isotropy is established by definition.

Only because it was discovered to be true experimentally.

There is no experiment to prove it.

Sure there is. The Michelson-Morley experiment was one, as are more recent optical resonator experiments: https://arxiv.org/abs/1002.1284

The paper you linked has no word about length contraction.
How is that possible?
The quality of papers is going downhill.

No, the isotropy of the speed of light is not tested here if the length contraction is not being discussed.

[Kryptid]

The paper you linked has no word about length contraction.
How is that possible?
The quality of papers is going downhill.

No, the isotropy of the speed of light is not tested here if the length contraction is not being discussed.

And how did you come to that conclusion?

[Jaaanosik (OP)]

The paper you linked has no word about length contraction.
How is that possible?
The quality of papers is going downhill.

No, the isotropy of the speed of light is not tested here if the length contraction is not being discussed.

And how did you come to that conclusion?

It's a hole in the analysis.

Any opinion about conservation of angular moment as shown in post #20?

[Kryptid]

It's a hole in the analysis.

How so? Light doesn't experience length contraction and the speed of the device itself is so low that length contraction shouldn't be an issue.

Any opinion about conservation of angular moment as shown in post #20?

It's been a while since I've studied magnetism and currents, so I'm not equipped at the moment to give an analysis.

[Jaaanosik (OP)]

...
It's been a while since I've studied magnetism and currents, so I'm not equipped at the moment to give an analysis.

Here is a textbook figure. The shape of EM field around a moving charge is velocity dependent for both, E and M.



The electron E field rotates counter clockwise in the figure below.


It is stronger ahead of electron because of the tilt.
The orientation of E field repels the plates clockwise and the conservation of angular momentum is preserved.
I hope this helps.

[Jaaanosik (OP)]

... to discuss the most important point of our understanding of the physics!?!?!?

[Jaaanosik (OP)]

This is continuation of the analysis.
The field of accelerated electron rotates:




We pick electron Q charges as per the figure above.
Using the following Lorentz force equation as per David J. Griffiths Introduction to Electrodynamics page 460:




We calculate the Lorentz forces.
The repulsive Lorentz force between qQ₁ is equal to qQ₂ in K rest frame.
The repulsive Lorentz force between qQ₁ is bigger than qQ₂ in K'₁ frame.
The repulsive Lorentz force between qQ₂ is bigger than qQ₁ in K'₂ frame.

Angular momentum has two parts, orbit - the curved trajectory and spin/rotation of a body.
The orbit is frame dependent but the direction of the spin/rotation has to be agreed upon by all inertial observers.
The rest frame K calculations do not predict any spin/rotation of the plates.
The K'₁ calculations predict clockwise spin/rotation of the plates.
The K'₂ calculations predict counter clockwise spin/rotation of the plates.