xshen

It is clear that we argue “Light Speed is independent with the Light Source or not”. Let’s discuss more detail: SR introduced a stationary frame, lets call O; a moving frame, call A, with speed relative to O is V1; and also introduced a special frame-Light Source frame, call L, with speed relative to A is V2. If “Light speed is independent to light source” is truth, then the L frame could be any speed relative to A under one condition: at initial time T=0, O,A and L overlay together, the rest situation will be exactly same discussion in SR. SR only discussed two special situations: V2=0 (rested with O frame), V2=V1 (rested with A frame). When analyzed time, SR used V2=V1 situation (1/2 total time=forward time), when analyzed speed and time relationship, used V2=0, this randomly choice also cause confusion. If V2≠0 and V2≠V1, after certain time, L could appear any location along x axis, it may appear at left of O, between O and A, at right of A, even right of B (A, B is the end of long bar in SR), question: How to choose the light path to create the equations as SR? Many experiments shown the light speed is independent from light source, is this only way to explain such strange postulation? When Maxwell developed electrodynamics, many people believed that the ether exist, late proved it was wrong. Michelson-Morley experiment may easy explain that all equipments and light source stayed in the same frame. There are many article in cyber that disprove those experiments, I have no time and ability to study and make explanations here. I only focus the SR 2nd postulation problem. Assuming the SR just creates now and people try to understand or not agree with their fresh mind, what will you make decision?

Give time, I'll reply you Merged post follows: Consecutive posts merged1. The “speed” must refer some frame, without some frame, “speed” has no meaning. If say it’s speed always c for any frame, where the c v came from in SR derivation? I do not think the light speed c is the maximum speed for every physical evens. It is a physical infinite speed derivation from SR. 2. Derivation of the light speed from “Maxwell’s equation is c. Maxwell did not specify what frame relative is. Some time people mention the “speed” really refer to the earth. If Maxwell said the light speed relative for any frame, there is the same question as number 1. 3. The synchronize means every even (clock) run at the same rate of changing, just the initial values are different. So we can choose a standard clock for everywhere that not only synchronized but also simultaneously. In my article my conclusion is clock in all space are synchronized, only SR said the clock in move frame and the clock in stationary not synchronized, not me. 4. Some one said the SR can explain and predict some things. Following this reason, why need to create SR to replace Newton and Galileo theory, because they also explain and predict so many physical evens. How to pass one frame to another frame. In my article, I followed Newton and Galileo rule. The SR also following the Newton and Galileo rule. Actual in my article, the rule and symbol even the first equations are the same as SR. The different is how to explain the path of the light beam. The Ritz’s Theory of ballistic light. Here I just make a sample: Assuming a particular “gun” fire a bullet at a constant speed v. If you stay with “gun” frame, no mater this frame moving or not, it is always true, if you stay outside of the “gun” frame, it is not the same as v. lets continue this sample, there are two long train move departure each other, assuming one rear end aligned with other front, at this time, a bullet shoot between this two trains (all of three things are parallel), how does the observer in each train to describe the bullet movement if “gun” (frame) not mentioned? P.S. why my topic marked as "moved"

I am not deny the constancy of the speed of light is a constant c, I just say the speed of light is a constant c relative with it Light Source, and dependent with its source. The “speed” must refer something or frame, the naturally choose is Light Source frame that it stay with, if we do so, it is contradiction with SR postulation, if we do not choose the Light Source frame, according SR “independent”, then we can randomly choose any frame which may lead to many different result. In my article I use the same rule as “stationary frame clock synchronization to move from one frame to another since the clock sync is "free from contradictions" in the any frame”. If clock sync each other, simplicity way is set them are all same. I am not creating a new theory, I just point out the Newton or Galileo theory is correct. I hope someone figure out what is wrong in my article, also appreciate make English correction in this article.

Attached are the pdf and words format. Because the short article contains equation that can't paste here. Hope interesting people join discuss or e-mail me. my e-mail address is xl_shen@yahoo.com Why the Special Relativity is wrong.pdf Why the Special Relativity is wrong.doc

Special Relativity may be wrong, help me to correct. Wrong postulation of Principle of Relativity.pdf